President Woodrow Wilson wrote “the he Constitution of the United States is not a mere lawyers’ document, it is a vehicle of life and its spirit is always the spirit of the age.” One must keep this fact in mind when comparing the Constitution and the Articles of Confederation. There was a vast difference in the “spirit of the age” when these documents were drafted. Coming on the heels of the Declaration of Independence and the war against England, and afraid of a dictatorship or a government that did not listen to its people, the Articles of Confederation (which will be referred to as AoC) were written it a way that gave more power to the states. The problem with this type of government was that it was too difficult to enact or enforce laws and the government could not collect enough taxes to support itself. I believe the Constitution did a better job of protecting liberties, specifically in the areas of the federal court system, representation of the people, and the levy of taxes.
In chapter one, Gilmore introduces several key aspects that develop American law. He starts off by explaining, “from the beginning of social time there have been institutions like courts which have generated or excreted law or something like law” (pg.1). This is important because if courts and law have been a part of society since the very beginning it’s no wonder they play such an important role in today’s society. People often misunderstand the courts and believe that there must be a simpler way to interpret the law but no such thing has ever reached reality. To even begin to grasp how law develops, one must first look at the common law.
Many laws have evolved and changed meanings over time, and therefore, the “law of our land” must be applied as accurately as possible for the criminal justice system to work effectively. The original content for which the amendment regarding counsel stemmed from a need to reinforce the standards set by colonial Americans when they were facing the English. The right to counsel was not necessarily a positive state because often the counsel appointed was not working necessarily for the defendant’s best interest. Nowhere does the amendment explicitly state that the accused will be provided counsel by the government (Sonneborn, 2004). There has been an addendum that had to be put in place later to combat any legal issues that would have been faced when integrating the right to counsel clause into the modern criminal justice
This, the Fourth Circuit concluded, was not adequate proof of access. See
These contributions have had lasting importance in global history. One ancient civilization is Mesopotamia. Some major achievements were Hammurabi's Code, cuneiform and the wheel. The Hammurabi’s code is a legal code of the 18th century B.C or earlier, instituted by Hammurabi and dealing with criminal and civil matters, it was important because it was the first
. . So if the law be in opposition to the Constitution . . .
His works and contributions are studied today by both Jewish and non-Jewish scholars. “Maimonides is the most influential Jewish thinker of the Middle Ages, and quite possibly of all time” (Time Magazine). His impact on Judaism can be seen in the above quotes as people are praising him for the significant contributions he made to Judaism. His works are widely taught outside the Jewish world and within the Jewish world and his ethical writings inform Jewish thought to this day. His writings influenced later Christian philosophers such as Albert the Great and Thomas Aquinas.
The Constitution Who said that the farmers of The Constitution were not opinionated people like us? There was much thought put into this very important written document, as well as many arguments opposing the Amendments it states. Even the farmers of the Constitution did not had agreements and oppositions to it. Although there were many objections against The Constitution, they never changed the document itself. Its main purpose was to give set guidelines and mandates in which we must function, keeping everything in an orderly, structural way.
It would appear that in the eyes of Zinn, President Clinton left behind nothing but complications and a feeling of uneasiness for the next president to pick up. My reactions to these recent chapters are not very diverse. I am no longer surprised by the sheer amount of opinion that is put into this text. While I do not think badly of our past presidents, it is getting harder to separate my beliefs with Zinn’s “people’s perspective” since I have been immersed in his chapters for a long time. I can acknowledge an opinion, especially if it is an informed one, however, I must say my reaction to this chapter is one of slight disgust at the lack of respect Zinn shows for a previous president.
Indecisive people can pass on their responsibilities and “pass the buck,” and advisory people can propose their concepts and lobby for acceptance, but the President can ultimately turn to nobody else. Presidents must make the hard decisions. It is a heavy mantle to bear on those presidential shoulders. It is lonely at the top. President Johnson’s “wise men” possessed depth in their areas of expertise beyond that of the President, who was a master mover of legislation to accomplish domestic social programs but very much out of his league in military matters and international relations.