Amicus curiae Essays

What is Amicus Curiae: 1) Amicus Curiae is Latin which stands for “friend of the court”. A non-party with an interest in the outcome of a pending lawsuit who argues or presents information in support of or against one of the parties to the lawsuit. 2) An amicus curiae brief is a persuasive legal document filed by a person or entity in a case, usually while the case is on appeal, in which it is not a party but has an interest in the outcome—typically the rule of law that would be established by

In the Amicus Curiae Brief submitted by the Japanese American Citizens’ League it states, “We contend that General DeWitt accepted the views of racists instead of the principles of democracy because he is himself a confessed racist.” (210) I believe this statement

This shows how the freedom of speech the students had was good for them in the future and also our community. “An amicus curiae brief filed by the U.S. National Student Association, composed of college student governments said that allowing more freedoms to students would get them ready for college and make them better citizens” (The First Amendment: Tinker v. Des Moines)

Kelo v. City of New London was a case that peaked my interest. To me, this is a classic case of government overreach. Let us start from the beginning. In 1997 Susette Kelo purchased a home in the historic neighborhood of Fort Trumbull in New London, Connecticut. She had always dreamed of owning a home on the water and painstakingly restored it to it 's former glory. Pfizer, the pharmaceutical giant, had decided to build a factory near Fort Trumbull with plans to expand their business into the

In the 1803 case of Marbury v. Madison, the court used its jurisdiction authority to hear and decide the issues put forth in Marbury v. Madison. This Supreme Court case argued for William Marbury’s commission, although it was denied by Thomas Jefferson’s secretary, James Madison. This case further helped to establish judicial review, the power of the courts to review acts of other branches of government and the states. In the case of Marbury v. Madison, the court used appellate jurisdiction and

Ferarri Landau Mrs. Eaton Civics 7 February, 2017 Politics and Special Interest Groups Have you ever heard of special interest groups, lobbyists, or political action committees? Special interest groups are groups of people or organizations that seek or receive special advantages, typically through political lobbying. Similarly, Lobbyists seek to influence (a politician or public official) on a particular issue. Furthermore, political action committees are organizations that raise money privately

While the NAACP participates in lobbying, their main political tactics have traditionally been grassroots organizing and litigation. Since 1913, when the NAACP began establishing branch offices (there are now over 2,000 units), the organization has based much of its success on local organizing efforts (“Oldest and Boldest”). In April 2016, they mobilized in Washington, D.C. in order to “protect voting rights, get big money out of politics, and demand an up or down vote on President Obama’s Supreme

for executions in the past. However, they say that “the current data are too scanty to support conclusions of continuing racial discrimination” (Zeisel, 1981, p. 4). An example of this would be how Solicitor General, Robert Bork, said in his amicus curiae regarding a study’s conclusion that there was racial discrimination involved in rape cases, but he proceeded to state that there was no proof that racial discrimination

As seen in the CNN article (regarding Elonis v. U.S.), the Supreme Court needs information regarding previous court cases in order to make a determination in the Elonis case. They summon an Amicus Curiae brief (“friend of the court” brief) asking you to provide information about the First Amendment. Specifically they ask, “What is the current precedent concerning freedom of speech?” Begin your response here: The first amendment states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc. (EEOC v. A&F Stores) was a court case relating to hiring discrimination against women who wore hijabs that was seen by the Supreme Court in 2015 (“Abercrombie Resolves Religious Discrimination Case Following Supreme Court Ruling in Favor of EEOC”, 2015). The significant ruling for the case helped to define exactly what qualifies as employment discrimination, thus further expanding on Title VII’s examination of anti-discrimination

Game theory tries to prove that the justices will act strategically when trying to grant writs according to their ideology. In “Strategic Auditing in a political Hierarchy”, Cameron, Segal, and Songer are specifically looking at search and seizure cases from 1972 to 1986, and the writs that were granted by Supreme Court. The study could not account for the district court, but it could account for the circuit and supreme court. In the judicial common space, doctrinal compliance occurs when the lower

In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court in Tibble v. Edison International held that plan fiduciaries owe an ongoing duty to review plan investments periodically to ensure compliance with their obligations under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”). In doing so, the Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit’s holding that the statute of limitations for challenges to the continued offering of an investment option begins running only at the time the investment option is selected

Some may say the government did violated carpenters fourth amendment rights; however, if he had nothing to hide then why does the government need a warrant carpenters rights were not violated. Therefore, the court was correct in making the punishment for Timothy carpenter. The defendant in the case, Timothy Carpenter, was convicted and sentenced to 116 years in prison for his role in a series of armed robberies in Michigan and Ohio. At his trial, prosecutors introduced Carpenter’s cell phone records

as well as the Death With Dignity Act. One of the argument that Oregon made was the fact that states usually regulated and looked after their own medical practices. One of the main issues that was seen within the case was morality. There was an amicus curiae of the Catholic Medical Association, one of the multiple instances in which an issue of morality was involved. The state of Oregon addressed these issues of morality by assuring that there were in place many safeguards in the act, and that there

Michigan vs. Bay Mills is a recent case that was decided by the Supreme Court in 2013. I chose to research this case for my judicial process class because I found it interesting. It is interesting because I do not know much about the United States federal government, states and Native American tribe’s current relationship. I have always thought that Native Americans act on their own government system with no interference from the United States almost like they are a separate country/ nation just

government surveillance, and combating mass incarceration. The ACLU lobbies, but mostly uses legal means to affect the government. The ACLU provides legal counsel in civil liberties cases, files civil liberties suits, and participates often in amicus curiae briefs. In fact, no group save the Department of Justice has

In 2012, twelve million 18-25 year olds were enrolled in college in the United States (Krogstad par. 2). These students went through extensive processes to earn admittance. Some students, however, may have received an additional advantage due to nothing they could control. This advantage comes through race-based affirmative action programs. Race-based affirmative action programs are outdated and should be discontinued. The programs focus too much on surface differences in race, instead of the more

Deductive reasoning. I was well aware of how the banking business secured and stored it's notes. These seals are for protection as well as packaging. That the crime wasn't discovered until the counterfeit notes began to circulate, I reasoned that the employees sucessfully remove the real currency from the protective wrappings and replaced them with the bogus notes. My next ponderence was how. The flaw with this sealing of a stack of bank notes is that the paper used in the ribbons is different than

What is Judicial Activism? Judicial activism is when courts do not confine themselves to reasonable interpretations of laws, but instead create law. Alternatively, judicial activism is when courts do not limit their ruling to the dispute before them, but instead establish a new rule to apply broadly to issues not presented in the specific action. "Judicial activism" is when judges substitute their own political opinions for the applicable law, or when judges act like a legislature (legislating

1. Title and Citation Vance v. Ball State Univ. 570 U.S. ___ (2013) 2. Facts of the Case Maetta Vance got picked on by some coworkers, and eventually, one of them got a position acting like a supervisor, while she was working for the Ball State University Banquet and Catering Division of University Dining. These coworkers were Saundra Davis and Connie McVicker. One day, Vance and Saundra Davis had some oral arguments that badly ended with Davis’s physical assault on Vance by slapping her in the