In Clayman vs Obama, Judge Richard echoed that surveillance and collection of telephony data by NSA without the knowledge of the general public was against the spirit of the constitution of America. He said that the right to privacy is a right that needs to be guaranteed by the state. The right should not be taken away from the persons by the state. In another ruling ten days after the first one, J. William in ACLU vs Clapper arrived at a diametrically opposite decision with a different reasoning. The judge appreciated the right to privacy as envisioned under the constitution but argued that the value of intelligence outweighed the right.
What must a party show in order to survive a motion for summary judgment for lack of standing? 3. If a plaintiff is not an object of government action, what must a party show in order to show standing? 4. Can Congress pass legislation that allows for the creation of citizen suits that confer standing upon citizens who would not be able to allege an injury in fact?
The First Amendment: Freedom of the Press The First Amendment prohibits Congress from preventing citizens from writing their opinions even when speaking ill of the government. Citizens can print anything as long as they think it to be true. If they knowingly print false information, it is considered libel and is unlawful. The First Amendment was proposed on September 25, 1789 and was ratified on December 15, 1791. Freedom of the press was provided in the First Amendment to prohibit Congress from punishing people for publishing their opinions.
Exclusionary Rule Search and seizures are protected under the fourth Amendment of the Constitution. Officer that go beyond the law and obtain evidence without a warrant are in breach of a person’s fourth amendment right. The evidence that is obtained is not admissible in court and fall under the exclusionary rule. This paper will discuss the benefits of the exclusionary rule, as well as alternative remedies to the rule. Reason for the Exclusionary Rule The exclusionary rule was created to protect innocent people from being harassed from law enforcement.
266, that a petition to a Government official was actionable if prompted by "express malice," which was defined as "falsehood and the absence of probable cause," and nothing has been presented to suggest that that holding should be altered. Nor do the Court's decisions interpreting the Petition Clause in contexts other than defamation indicate that the right to petition is absolute. The Clause was inspired by the same ideals of liberty and democracy that resulted in the First Amendment freedoms to speak, publish, and assemble, and there is
Judicial review is the right, or duty, the court has to review the constitutionality of legislation and/or actions taken by the executive branch. The court has the right to choose its cases, but these are brought before them not sought after by the court. What is the separation of powers? This is a form of checks and balances between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government. They are in place so as to contain the power of any one branch attempting to overstep its authority and act in a tyrannical matter.
The Privilege was used as a way to let the president have some privacy in things that would affect national security. But when Executive Privilege is used the President should have to give a private written explanation to congress as well as the Supreme Court. They should do this so that it could maybe reduce the chances of the media finding out and spreading it like
Likening such statements to fraud, defamation, or lies to government agencies, all of which can be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment, the dissenters argued that the government should have a free hand to prosecute those who lie about having earned military honors. The dissenters recognized that false statements may be protected when laws restricting them might chill otherwise protected speech, but argued that the Stolen Valor Act does not implicate that concern because the subject matter of the lies does not relate to any protected
Martin’s argument on how the Charter is antidemocratic has six main premises. Firstly, Martin supports his claim by making a point that judges, as they hold no accountability for what their judgments, can “overturn deliberate policy decisions made by the elected representatives of the people where those decisions do not accord with the way the judges interpret the Charter.” Thus, the Charter, according to Martin, is antidemocratic. Secondly, Martin discerns the differences between liberalism and democracy, creating operational definitions for each. He explains that liberalism “is about individual rights,” and is “about the ability of individuals to do as they please without interference from the state.” Therefore, according to Martin, Liberalism “makes protection of the autonomy of the individual more important than the promotion of the welfare of the
An example is when the Miranda Doctrine is not observed upon arresting, the right of self-incrimination may be invoked so as for the evidences against the defense be inadmissible. In order for the Miranda Doctrine to be validly executed, such must be stated in the presence of the counsel for the defense. Such doctrine may be waived, but must be made with utmost knowledge of its consequences (Israel et al, 1993). Although both Fifth and Sixth Amendments embody significant rights for the citizens, it still has differences, one of which is that pertaining to the inquiries pertaining to the case is not allowed in the Fifth Amendment. The Sixth amendment protects the accused upon the case against him.