Wills’ claims that the federal government's chief law enforcement official might need a refresher course on federal law pertaining to legal immigrants. Some American legislators have taken up the position that prohibiting bilingual ballots would be racist. However, evidence shows that millions of other American citizens feel that prohibiting the bilingual ballot is a step in the right direction. Wills’ begins his article with a political anecdote quoted by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. When he was asked whether he would favor the prohibition of the bilingual ballot, he simply stated, “Of course not.” Wills’ continues in the next section stating that our national identity and our federal laws are being weakened by immigration that is influenced by these bilingual ballots.
Today’s society finds it necessary question to what range a jury can take the laws of America, change them, and make them their own. A jury can subject laws created through aggressive hindsight and discussion which leads to a dismissal of a case. This leaves the question as to if jury nullification weakens the rule of law that is in the American Constitution. The altercations of the laws are the result of the juries repeated use of jury nullification. If juries continue to use jury nullification, it will result in a weakened democratic system.
However, Clarence Thomas, who went through the Senate hearings in October 1991 described them as a ‘high-tech lynching’. Thomas was called back before the committee to answer questions of sexual harassment against a former employee. This can be seen as politically controversial as it can be seen more as political point-scoring and attempting to embarrass or make the nominee look good rather than real questioning of the nominees judicial beliefs and philosophies. Finally, a vote comes from the Senate floor to confirm or veto the candidate for a seat on the court. This can be achieved by a simple majority.
Explain the factors that limit the power of the Supreme Court (15 Marks) The Supreme Court has many checks on it to avoid any tyranny as the founding fathers had wanted; this was through checks like the Senate being able to reject nominations of judges, Impeachment and no initiation power. Upon the death or retirement of a judge the president has the task of nominating someone to replace them, to avoid the president nominating someone who largely has similar views as them or overloading a court with conservative or liberal judges after previous appointments the Senate will review the nominations and if they are unhappy with it then it will be rejected and a new nomination must be made, this stops any court from having too much of a political leaning and makes it completely impartial avoiding any tyranny Judges always have the possibility of impeachment as well, although this has never happened to a supreme court justice it did almost happen in 1969 to justice Abe Fortas, who resigned before he could be impeached to avoid having this record to his name. In this justices are always accountable to any scandals or wrong doing within the court meaning they must act in line with what is expected of them. The supreme court has no initiation power, they cannot decide to create a case and review it themselves, they must wait until a case is brought to them before acting upon it, with this balance in place they cannot select a certain area of the Constitution to try and influence an amendment or choose to pass a law without the public wishes. Overall there are several ways the Supreme Court has its power limited, this is through the Senate rejecting nominations, the possibility of impeachment of all justices and the fact that the Court has no initiation power.
This took a very anti communist stance, where one report compiled by Nixon looked at the ‘Marshall Plan’ aimed at rebuilding Western Europe and more importantly, repelling communist ideology. Furthermore, Nixon became a very public member of congress, often speaking about international events, and criticising President Truman’s handling of the Korean War, and fighting the causes of international relief aid, but also becoming a public figure against the fight against communism, as the red scare took its toll on the public at the time, which would see the ideology demonised by the government after the second world war, which consequently led onto fear of both China and the USSR among the American public. This Anti Communist stance made Nixon an ideal running candidate for the Republicans in 1953 election, and was chosen by Eisenhower to be the Vice-Presidential Nominee, when in office, Nixon’s political career was excelling brilliantly, partly due to the similarities of the public ideologies of the time, and how Nixon managed to capitalize on this effect. In this respect, Nixon was a very highly favored politician in the Eisenhower administration, often playing
The Supreme Court holds the power of judicial review over both the executive and the legislature. The power of judicial review is the power of the judiciary to declare acts of Congress and the executive unconstitutional and therefore null and void. This therefore means that the Supreme Court can strike down bills. We saw this recently in 1998 with the Clinton v. New York City, it declared the Line Item Veto act unconstitutional. Therefore, we can see simply by the powers held by the Supreme Court that appointments have to be controversial, in order to ensure
Senator Gravel protested this subpoena arguing that requiring the aide to testify would be a violation of the Speech and Debate clause. The Law Article 1, Section 6 of the United States Constitution. Specifically the Speech and Debate Clause. Legal Questions 1. Under the Speech and Debate Clause, are members of Congress exempt from questioning in the investigation of the commission of a crime?
The firm of “Warren and Brandeis” spent much of their time arguing against monopolies and large corporations and advocating for free speech. Together Brandeis and Warren published a famous article in The Harvard Law Review, “The Right to Privacy.” This article argued that private citizens should have the right to be left alone and the press should not be permitted to publish their photos or the details of their lives without their permission. Brandeis and Warren were angered by the media attention focused on the lavish parties the Warren family threw throughout the 1880s. They wrote, "Gossip is no longer the resource of the idle and of the vicious, but has become a trade, which is pursued with industry as well as effrontery.” Brandeis and Warren also 2 stated that during the first 100 years of the United States, the
Using sarcasm, irony, and wit to bring change in society, satirical artists began using politics as a target for their criticisms. During this time in history, the political environment was strict and unforgiving. Criticizing the government in almost anyway could very well result heavy punishment or even banished from society (Lamm 175). So why would artists continue to use satire? Is it entirely necessary or even relevant?
On February 9, 1950, Senator Joseph McCarthy launched his crusade against "communism" as he saw it. The speech delivered in Wheeling, WV was infamous for its reference to members of Congress who McCarthy accused of being members of the Communist Party. The insinuation was that these men were silent enemies working in favor of the Soviet Union for the downfall of the American government and way of life. In the Wheeling speech, McCarthy played on the Cold War and Red Scare fears (fear of a communist takeover) by asserting that the communist world, particularly the Soviet Union, was in a showdown with the democratic nations led by the United States. He charged that there were 205 communist spies in the state department who were selling out the United States.