Presidents use their appointees to cement their legacy, trying to choose individuals who share their ideology. I know that has become a dirty world in how the government uses to interpret the law, but right now, there is a very bright line separating conservative and progressive issues. One should nominate someone who believes in the same causes he or she does. Choosing a nominee who is not, already a judge has the advantage of giving less fodder to the opposition, because she has no opinions available for scrutiny. On the other hand, she could turn out to be something other than the president expected.
I believe the author was trying to show that even though there are still segregation problems, the United States is coming a long way in that issue. What really stuck out to me in the end of the interview was how baffled Standweiss was because our president only checks one box when it comes to his race, even though he is a mixed individual. I’m not depicted that any race is better than others, but it seems like President Obama believes he can make a bigger difference being classified as African American, rather than Caucasian, like Clarence King. Works Cited: "Festival of Books." Interview by Murry Fromson.
She is unhappy about the unnecessary expense this statute imposes on her business and intends to file suit against the state of Confusion in an attempt to overturn the statute. In this paper I will discuss, which court will have jurisdiction over Tanya’s suit and whether the statute set-up by the state of Confusion is constitutional. I will list the stages in a civil suit and explore what provisions of the United States Constitution will be functional by the courts to determine the statute’s validity. Because the state of Confusion set- up this law, most likely they will not bulge in changing the law. Especially if one views that Tanya Trucker is the only complainant.
TERM LIMITS FOR CONGRESS I believe that term limits should be placed on our Congressmen and women because it would allow for a more efficient Congress. The current Congress is in shambles, a dismal failure and is in desperate need of new ideas, procedures, and influence. With term limits in place, Congress will be more responsible toward their constituents because they themselves will soon be constituents. They will have to live under and abide by the laws they created while in office. They’ll have less time in office to develop money ties to lobbyists and other special interest groups, thereby weakening the threat of lobbyists being able to influence legislation.
Who would have known that it would be easier to endure a sex scandal in politics than in business? Despite the fact that some may question how a president of the United States could keep his head above water that is a sex scandal, but not the CEO of a foremost company, the answer is that the policies have been modified. On the other hand, President Bush's morality program, with a famous platform in opposition to abortion and in favor of self-restraint as the solution to sex education, is mainly ascribed with delivering him a second term in office. Some, though, are questioning the necessity of his resignation. Detractors say that Boeing is perplexed.
To begin with, the word “sacred crow” is something that is well respected and people do not want criticized. Document t B talks about serving the jury system and how it works. Americans attend the jury because they are accustomed to and can receive consequences for not attending. Based on the facts that Document B exhibits, the American jury system is not a good idea solely because people will be criticized
Shyla Corson Professor Griffin English Composition 1102 16 March 2013 Article Analysis The proof type most noticeable to me in the “A Flood of Suits Fights Coverage of Birth Control” article was Ethos. Ethos refers to the credibility of the author and is often conveyed through the tone of what is being said and also how the author speaks on different views. Ethan Bronner, the author, begins with the views of the government. He explains why the president along with the Supreme Court feel as if the new health care act is a good idea and their reasoning’s behind the creation and rulings in court cases. The information in the article wasn’t just made up, general statements however.
Court History and Purpose Paper Melody Kibbe CJA/224 November 29th, 2013 Professor Jennifer Martin Abstract Throughout the American History courts have played an important role in our society. Still today courts play a significant part in what we do and how we choose to do things. Without courts innocent people would have no chance to appeal their cases in front of judges, juries and some fellow peers. Sharing with you today I hope gives you a better understanding of a court and its purpose, the dual court system, the role that early legal codes, the common law, and precedent played in the development of courts, and the role of courts in the criminal justice system today. .
Even inside the borders of our great nation, the Constitution shows that it’s still relevant to the American society. For example, the 27th amendment says that Congressmen and women can’t raise their salary while in office. If this amendment weren’t in place, then our debt wouldn’t be to China; instead it would be to the Congressional Officers of the United State government. Now to reference into foreign countries again; in some countries like South Africa, the right of women’s and colored person’s suffrage isn’t allowed. In other countries like Libya the right to vote is granted to no one because they are either under a dictatorship or the entire country is in mass chaos.
For example in 2010, President Obama appointed Elena Kagan to be a justice of the Supreme Court. For democrats this was a brilliant nomination as Kagan herself is a democrat. Because of the life tenure granted to justices, many of the time justices outlive the presidents time in office. The Supreme Court is seen as political due to this, the appointment of justices’ are really in favour of the president’s political interest as they are somewhat of a legacy of the President who appoints them, to ensure his political ideology remains somewhere in the US system. The US Supreme Court is also seen as a political institution rather than a judicial one because of the power of the court through judicial review.