P. L. 86-272 Case Study

There have been thousands amendments proposed in Congress. The Constitution creates a two-stage amendment process. This process is known as the proposal and ratification. It is extremely difficult for an amendment to become a part of the Constitution. Therefore, an amendment can be blocked at any given time.

The 1990 case of Employment Division v. Smith is about Smith and Black who were both members of a Native American Church and counselors at a private drug rehabilitation clinic. They were both fired because they had taken peyote as a part of their religious ceremonies, at that time the possession of peyote was a crime under the State law. The counselors filed for unemployment in the state, but were denied by the Employment Division because the reason for their unemployment was work-related misconduct. Smith and Black argued, stating that under the First Amendment the government is forbidden from prohibiting the "free exercise" of religion in this case the free exercise of peyote. Court of Appeals reversed the ruling, saying that denying them unemployment benefits for their religious use of peyote violated their right to as it was a part of their religion.

Court Case Citation Everson v. Board of Education Argued November 20, 1946 Decided February 10, 1947 Supreme Court 5-4 FACTS A New Jersey law allowed parents of students to collect reimbursements of money for students who used public transportation. Children who attended private religious schools also qualified for this reimbursement.

The United States Supreme Court is the highest judge on the most important issues that our country faces involving the constitution. These judgements are entrusted to nine men and women who, once appointed, can remain in their positions for as long as they live. There is no other Supreme Court in the world that permits their justices to serve for life (Morrison np). The high court officials of most other countries serve for fixed term lengths or are required to retire at a certain age (Morrison np). It appears that much has changed since the inception of the United States Supreme Court in 1787; and life tenure no longer seems to be the most appropriate approach.

According to the author, most people who do not agree with Supreme Court decision in favor religion (creationists) on cases involving science and religion, believes there are lack of consistency in the rulings. They believe the court do not stand by the principle of law for their ruling. The author referred to Edwards v. Aguillard, "creationism case,” as one case of inconsistent in ruling. This case happened in 1982, where in the beginning, the law was enacted in Louisiana to allow the teaching of creation along with evolution as science subject in public schools or none of them is not allowed to be teaching in public schools. The aim of the ruling was to serve as “Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-Science in Public School Instruction" Act.

TSgt Emilio L. Gordon, failed to report to his assigned WAPS test date. He accepts full responsibility for the lack of judgement on his part, and expressed his deepest apologies for the no show. I have reviewed his qualifications and performance indicators and hereby recommend him for promotion

The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest and most important judicial body in the country. The justices are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The Supreme Court has a special role in the government system, since the Constitution gives it the power to check the actions of Congress and the President if necessary. There are nine seats in the Supreme Court, one is the Chief Justice and the other eight are Associate Justices, but since Antonin Scalia’s death there has been only eight seats. The Q&A movie interviews the U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia before he passed away in February 2016.

WHAT is this story about? List two important facts from the article. The story discusses the apparent lack of diversity in the Supreme Court and how diversity could strengthen and bring different perspectives to the court. 1.

It became apparent to the United States Supreme Court Justices, that the newly appointed colleague, Justice Antonin Scalia, brought a legal philosophy which would “test the courts” in the interpretation of the United States Constitution and how it should apply the law to a variety of landmark cases. Antonin Scalia made no apologies for his legal philosophy of “originalism,” despite oppositions from other Court Justices, his critics, and the public. Scalia believed that the United States Constitution should strictly be interpreted in terms of what the Founding Fathers had meant when the Constitution was written originally (Ring 107). Antonin Scalia received his A.B. from the prestigious, Georgetown University and the University of Fribourg,

Whenever the death of a person results from any act, conduct, occurrence, transaction, or circumstances which, if death had not ensued, would have entitled such person to recover damages in respect thereof, the person or party who, or the corporation which, would have been liable if death had not ensued shall be liable in an action for damages, not withstanding the death of the person injured. The wrongful death statute is not in derogation of the common law, and it does not take away any common law right. The wrongful death statute evidences a legislative intent to place the cost of unsafe activities upon the actors who engage in them, and thereby provide a tortious conduct."