But the administration of these codes should not give criminals sanctuary from the law.” With this thought in mind, it came to my sense that the title of this article basically summarizes to whole discussion. The title can help you come up with the idea that students shouldn’t be ignoring the law, and throughout the article are reasons why. If a student were to commit a crime on campus, the university security wouldn’t even be able to fine or imprison the student. “The penalty for criminal assault is often not much worse than being tossed out of a club”. After being given the example of the student who was still
Hogan was decided correctly because it violated the Fourteenth Amendment; by men being in the school it does not prevent women from gaining training or other opportunities, and the medical field is not specifically just a woman’s job. Hogan was decided correctly because his right to the Fourteenth Amendment was violated. The Fourteenth Amendment is defined as: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law, which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, (Letric Law Library). Due to the Fourteenth Amendment, Hogan had the right to attend Mississippi University, School of Nursing Baccalaureate Program, even if he is a male.
The Court has approached most of the cases in a disorganized fashion, focusing on narrow aspects of policy rather than dealing with the whole. For example, in 2003, the University of Michigan's affirmative action policies decisively upheld the right of affirmative action in higher education. There were two cases: the University of Michigan's undergraduate program, Gratz v. Bollinger, and its law school, Grutter v. Bollinger. The Supreme Court upheld the University of Michigan Law School's policy, ruling that race can be one of many factors considered by colleges when selecting their students because it furthers "a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body." The Supreme Court, however, ruled that the more formulaic approach of the University of Michigan's undergraduate admissions program, which uses a point system that rates students and awards additional points to minorities, had to be modified.
Indeed, Vartan Gregorian, the president of Brown University had to take action, along with the Undergraduate Disciplinary Council and they concluded that Hann had to leave the University forevermore. The president of Brown University, Vartan Gregorian denies that they haven’t expelled anyone for the “exercise of free speech”. Nat Hentoff, argues that Douglas Hann should have not been expelled from Brown University, regardless Hann’s drunken incidents and hateful speech. Hentoff feels that hate speech codes, such as the ones at Brown University are a direct violation of the first amendment. Furthermore Hentoff claims Hann should not have been expelled because the school codes at Brown University are supposed to apply disciplinary action to students that show flagrant
In my personal life my strengths will help me tremendously. Adaptability could help me in future jobs or relationships. Communication and woo will help to have better relations with people who enter my life and to keep them there. I also like to always think positive. Thinking in positive ways not only makes me feel better about situations, but I know it also helps other people dealing with the situation too.
Where to Draw the Line The First Amendment of the U.S. constitution boldly states that “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech.” As members of society, we witness this privilege utilized in both positive and negative ways through our daily lives. But, what happens when this liberty is abused and the emotions of certain groups are damaged in response to this “freedom?” Through his essay, “Protecting Freedom of Expression at Harvard,” scholar and former president of Harvard University, Derek Bok, expresses his firm claim that “Hanging a Confederate flag in public view or displaying a swastika in response is insensitive and unwise because any satisfaction it gives students is far outweighed by the discomfort it causes
The fourteenth amendment has been used to successfully used to fight against segregation and discrimination because while states have dominion over those peoples and those facilities within their confines they cannot discriminate against those people because those people are in large, part of the United States, and those in the United States have uninalienble rights granted to them by the Constitution that no state can take away. Martin Luther King’s nonviolent acts of direct civil disobedience held a large impact on the civil rights movement. He showed that you could directly take action against laws you thought were unjust in a civil peaceful manner of descent. In 1896 Justice John Harlan spoke out against segregation saying that “Our Constitution is color-blind and neither knows nor tolerates classes among its citizens.” The Constitution should be blind to the color of your skin, to your religion, to your gender, and anything else that tries to label you in a way other than U.S. citizen. In regards to the economy the role of gender should not apply, but it usually does though not usually through intentional discrimination.
Student Professor English 305 6 November 2009 I Say No To Hate Crime Laws Hate crimes are an irrational, ignorant and cowardly expression of desperation. A person who commits a hate crime is desperate to feel better, superior and in control. That being said, there should not be special laws and mandatory sentences for people who commit these heinous acts of violence because they do not accomplish the goals of eradicating or deterring bigotry. If we, as a society, put special laws and punishments into our legal system, we are unequivocally saying that the motive of these acts is more important than the intent or outcome of these crimes. I do not believe this is true nor do I feel that this is the position of the majority of people in
This would encourage public involvement in politics and act as an improvement to our democratic society. If people know their rights and freedoms and understand how the government works it would dissolve the problem of political ignorance and apathy. This argument shows that a codified constitution is of greater benefit than an uncodified constitution because it will lessen political apathy, however, one could argue, how much better of an understanding would the public have of politics if the constitution was codified than if it was uncodified? Our basic rights and freedoms are common knowledge, and our human rights are codified as they are part of the EU which has a written constitution. Manifesto’s for political parties, such as Labour, are also written and campaign projects clearly set out
Once this reluctance is overcome our society will improve dramatically. It is a proven truth that the betterment and improvement of any social system depends upon the depth of the relationship which its individuals enjoy. Moreover, educating students about diverse cultures can help them understand their own culture in a better manner. Contrasting their own trends and ideas with others, is a very good way of understanding that what is better and why. The juvenile minds will not only learn about other cultures, but will also get closer to their own culture.