This was created during a series of joint debates between Illinois senate candidates, Abraham Lincoln and Steven Douglas. Lincoln asked Douglas of his opinion on whether the state’s or Supreme Court’s decree of slavery in each state would prevail. Douglas replied that no matter how the court ruled, slavery would stay down, if the people of that state voted it down. Although Douglas defeated Lincoln for the Senate seat, he experienced an immense loss of support by Southern Democrats, and hurt his chances of winning the presidential election. Because, most of the Democratic party disagreed with his opinion, Douglas not only contributed to his own downfall, but also to the split of the Democratic
While doing this the author then informs the audience that the family that has bought the house is a black family. In the 50’s and 60’s many people thought that if a black family moved into a white neighborhood that the neighborhood would not be worth its value anymore. They also thought if a black family moved into the community the white families that lived there would move out a rapid pace and it would be lost to the black families of Chicago. Another example of racism in Act 1 is when Jim decides to ask Francine a hypothetical question. Jim asks Francine if her and her
The case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court where they said that prior restraint, except in rare cases, is unconstitutional for violating the First Amendment. However, it cited when prior restraint can be used, including that, “…primary requirements of decency may be enforced against obscene publications.” Minnesota lawmakers were later able to shut down Neal’s paper for
Discrimination can be direct or indirect, verbal abuse and unwanted physical contact. An example of direct discrimination would be: If a black employee is not selected for promotion because of his race. An example of indirect discrimination would be: An apartment stores prohibits all employees from covering their head up however this rule means people(s) with religious beliefs who are required to cover their heads are prevented working for the store. This would be indirect discrimination unless the store can find an objective reason for justifying the policy. Characteristics protected by the Equality Act 2010 are as followed: •
Individuals, coaches, and clubs, have brought equal protection claims against many institutions having selfishly destroyed men’s teams, but courts seem to be reluctant. For a valid equal protection claim (EPC), "a plaintiff must allege in the pleadings that the government intentionally discriminated against [them] by classifying him or her for different treatment under the law than one similarly situated" (Bentley pg. 9). This notion seems to be paradoxical, having courts decisions endorsing the elimination of men’s games. There is a continuing rejection of court cases involving the violations of Title IX using the EPC method, proving that reform is necessary.
Unfortunately, Mr. Pickering was removed from his teaching position but he did not stop fighting for his case. (Secunda 2010) The appellant, Marvin Pickering, then requested the review of the Board's action in the Circuit Court of Will County, Illinois, which declared his dismissal on the grounds that his letter was detrimental to the interests of the school system. Fortunately while on appeal the Supreme Court of Illinois affirmed the judgment. He was then able to requested review in the US Supreme Court and the high court granted certiorari. The US Supreme Court ruled eight votes for Pickering and one vote against.
Others argue that it is a right for everyone in the United States of America to bare arms. Take in case McDonald v. City of Chicago. McDonald claimed that his second amendment rights were being infringed upon when he was not able to have a handgun in his home. The courts later ruled that a total ban of guns is unconstitutional and McDonald should be allowed to carry his weapon in his home for self-defense
David Gray CJUS 200 Application Essay 2-15-14 Can you seize the marijuana plants at that time? If yes, what is your legal justification for doing so? If no, what legally prohibits you from doing so? No, as a police officer you would not be able to seize the marijuana plants at this time, by doing so you would be violating the rights of the citizens of the house that was entered due to the noise ordinance. Actually, the fourth amendment would actually keep you from doing so because it states that “every citizen right to be free from unreasonable government intrusion into their persons, homes, businesses, and property –whether through police stops of citizens on the street, arrests, or searches of homes and businesses”.
Many states enacted right-to-work laws making closed “union only” shops illegal, in an attempt to lure businesses away from their Northern strongholds. They also believed that strikes conducted by unions would deter the industrial migration south, and thus stifle economic growth. The trend continues to this day as can be seen with UAW’s attempt to unionize the Volkswagen plant in Chattanooga, Tennessee. Adrian Leslie, a line worker at the plant, stated that “I see no need for union representation, we are
She felt he sabotaged the Wall Street Journal by allowing the New York Times to run the story. P&G’s position on their actions was stated as being due to the “significant and ongoing leaks of our confidential business data, plans and strategies.” They filed a complaint which resulted in a grand jury investigation. It was based on 1967 and 1974 laws which made it a crime for employees to give away articles representing trade secrets and prohibits employees from disclosing confidential information. Reporters are protected by the First Amendment and in Ohio, “shield-laws” protect the reporters’ confidential sources identity. The Ohio laws’ interpretation was ambiguous; therefore, P&G’s claims were unfounded.