Tanya Trucker, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. According to TITLE 28 > PART IV > CHAPTER 81 > § 1251 of the U.S. code (a) The Supreme Court shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction of all controversies between two or more States. (b) The Supreme Court shall have original but not exclusive jurisdiction of: (1) All actions or proceedings to which ambassadors, other public ministers, consuls, or vice consuls of foreign states are parties; (2) All controversies between the United States and a State; (3) All actions or proceedings by a State against the citizens of another State or against aliens. The Supreme Court shall have jurisdiction, in both law and fact with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the congress shall
State of Confusion The state of Confusion has promulgated a statute necessitating all trucks and towing trailers that travel its highways to use a B-type truck hitch. As a result of this statute, any trucker who wants to drive through Confusion must stop and have the new hitch installed or drive around Confusion. Moreover, only one manufacturer in Confusion produces this hitch. The federal government has not made any effort to standardize truck hitches being used on highways in the United States. Tanya Trucker owns a trucking company in the state of Denial and is not happy about the added expense this statute forces on her business.
Disappointed, the Tinker’s appealed their case to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court decided to hear this case because they have made attempts in the past to define the freedom of speech limitations. They wanted to hear the constitutionality of Des Moines’ anti-armband
The Supreme Court presides on cases that conflict with the Constitutional laws and with treaties of foreign affairs. The framers of the US Constitution were determined to separate the powers of the federal government into three branches: Legislative, Executive, and Judicial. The Supreme Court is in the Judicial Branch of government. Once the Supreme Court renders a decision, all other courts in the country follow the precedent set by that decision (Dautrich and Yalof 277). This precedent is also known as Stare
In this paper I will discuss the history of Habeas Corpus, analyze its relevance, explain the Supreme Court’s interpretation (i.e. Boumediene V. Bush), as well as evaluate different perspectives. The Right of Habeas Corpus is derived from the Latin meaning “you have the body”. The meaning according to the U.S. Constitution is that there is a judicial mandate stating that a prisoner must be brought before a judge so that they can determine if we have a right to continue holding them. Habeas Corpus can only be suspended during times of rebellion and if there is an invasion of public safety.
Facts In this breach of contract action, we are asked to decide, among other things, whether the parties formed an enforceable purchase agreement. After a trial, the circuit court ruled that only an option contract was formed and that it was unenforceable. Although it was labeled as an option contract, it had all the elements of a purchase agreement, and the parties treated it as a purchase agreement. Therefore, we reverse and remand. IV.
And the Judicial branch explains the laws as well as checking to make sure all laws are constitutional. Thus, creating checks and balances which allows all three branches to check the powers of the other branches to prevent any certain branch from becoming too powerful. This limits the presidents’ powers due to the powers of the other branches. For instance, the judicial branch can rule an action by the president unconstitutional, and the legislative branch can over-ride a presidents’ veto at any one
* Between citizens of different states. * Between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states. * Between a state or citizens thereof and foreign states, citizens, or subjects. The federal courts have the rights to decide such cases. (Bagley, C. E., 2013, pg.
Only very limited types of matters can be brought in federal court. Generally, federal courts can hear civil cases only if there is an issue involving the meaning of a federal law (such as the Constitution or a law passed by Congress), or if the parties are from different states and more than $75,000 is at stake, or if the United States is a party to the lawsuit. For example, if a company violates a federal environmental law, a suit can
In April 2010, Arizona adopted the nation's toughest law on illegal immigration, provoking a nationwide debate and a Justice Department lawsuit. On July 28, one day before the law was to take effect, a federal district court judge struck down its most controversial provisions, including sections that called for officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws and that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times. In April 2011, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled against the State of Arizona and let stand the lower court's decision. The law, known locally as SB1070 or Senate Bill 1070, was aimed at discouraging illegal immigrants from entering or remaining in the state. It coincided with economic anxiety and followed