Although Breyer could possibly present a convincing argument, he lacks substantial evidence. McDonald challenges the City of Chicago regarding the Second Amendment and the fact that handguns should not be banned. He finds it an absolute necessity for him as he lives in a lower class neighborhood where gangs are present (Sigale, p3). A somewhat similar case 15 months prior, Heller v. District of Columbia established that the constitutional protection applies in
Hudson was charged under Michigan law with unlawful drug and firearm possession. When police arrived to execute the warrant, they announced their presence, but waited only a short time perhaps “three to five seconds” before turning the knob of the unlocked front door and entering Hudson’s home. At trial Hudson argued that police violated the knock and announce requirement, therefore all the evidence stemming from the search warrant should be inadmissible. The Trial Judge granted the motion to suppress the evidence. On appeal, Michigan Court of Appeals reversed the motion to suppress.
Chicago Medical School rejected his application. Steinberg filed a suit against the school, because it did not evaluate his and other applications according to the academic entrance criteria printed in the school’s bulletin. The trial court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss, but then Steinberg appealed. II. Steinberg’s argument was that the school rejected his application, because of nonacademic considerations.
Thomas Gibbons, another steamboat operator, competed with Aaron Ogden on this same route but held a federal coasting license issued by an act of Congress. Ogden filed a complaint in New York court to stop Gibbons from operating his boats, claiming that the monopoly granted by New York was legal even though he operated on shared, interstate waters. Gibbons disagreed arguing that the U.S. Constitution gave Congress the sole power over interstate commerce. After losing twice in New York courts, Gibbons appealed the case to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court determined that the commerce clause of the Constitution grants the federal government the power to determine how interstate commerce is conducted.
The case Kia Motors Corp. v. Ruiz is a very interesting one, in which several legal concepts were applied and debated during litigation. As mentioned above, KIA Motors Corp. argued that they were not liable on a design-defect theory because they complied with the applicable federal safety standards. Also, they argued that being liable on a design-defect theory will create a precedent in which federal safety standards will be omitted in the
Tyler Tew Mr. Combs Policing America 24 September 2011 Analysis Report of “Do Shall Issue Laws Save Lives?” This paper is about an article by Dr. John Lott, professor of The School of Law at The University of Chicago. In his article “Do Shall issue Laws Save Lives,” he discusses how concealed carry permits save lives and reduce crime. Concealed carry refers to the practice of legally being able to carry a handgun or any other weapon in public hidden or in close proximity. As of now there are no federal laws requiring someone to issue a concealed carry permit. Forty nine states have laws that allow citizens to carry certain weapons concealed in public.
Victims and others affiliated in the shooting sued Glock, claiming negligent marketing and public nuisance. Glock aimed for a dismissal for two reasons, that they could not be held liable for the criminal acts of Furrow and as the manufacturer, Glock owed no duty of care to the third-party victims of Furrow's firearm misuse. Furrow's criminal firearm misuse constituted a superseding cause of the victims' injuries for which Glock could not be held responsible. This was before the PLCAA was enacted. This claim had not come to a conclusion prior to the PLCAA, therefore, still
Right to Counsel Elsie M Farias CJA 364/ Criminal Procedure March 27, 2013 Professor Horwath Right to Counsel The Sixth Amendment of the United States constitution grants the right of a person accused of a crime the right to counsel to aid and represent themselves. This is known as the Right to Counsel. The Right to Counsel is founded on the Right to a fair trial. If a defendant is unable to retain their own counsel, they have the right to request one to be appointed to them. The defendant also has the right to not retain or request a lawyer and this turns their representation to Pro Sea which basically means one waives all their rights.
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
Chicago, McDonald sued Chicago arguing that the gun ban violated his individual Second Amendment right to have a gun for personal use. The case was brought before the Supreme Court and in 2010 in a five four split the Supreme Court held “An individual’s right to keep and bear arms is incorporated and applicable to the states through the 14th Amendments Due Process Clause” (Guncite 2). Justice Alito set forth “that it is a fundamental right and the 14th Amendment makes the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms fully applicable to the states” (Guncite 2); this was the first time that the Supreme Court extended these rights to the states. The justices emphasized that this ruling and the Second Amendment “only protects a right to possess a firearm in the home for lawful uses such as self defense” (Guncite 4). The Court made it clear that the Second Amendment does not protect all types of firearms or uses and that some state regulation is “constitutionally permissible” (Schwartz