So they use the constitution in many situations to protect the information they release to the public. Journalist is briefed to release the source of their information so that prosecution can take place on that individual. How could Novak’s publication of Valerie Plame’s identity jeopardize national security? * Exposing a covert agent cannot only jeopardize what case she is investigating at the moment but can also keep her from other cases. Not to mention can also put her and family members lives in danger.
Simpson case. Although the rights of freedom of press and speech are protected by the constitution, it was up to the Supreme Court to dictate if all types of media expression should be available to the public. The Miranda v Arizona case led to the creation of “Miranda Right” which provide defendants with the rights to counsel upon arrest. This decision corroborate the fifth amendment. When Mr. Miranda was arrested, it was common in many states, criminals (or accused criminals) were being interrogated for hours or even days without being informed of their right to an attorney.
Once a person has served the sentence for his or her crime they should be allowed to become productive members of society. However, there should be rules and requirements put into place for the individuals, it should not disenfranchise them completely. Speaking from experience it was hard being released from the Penal System. Gash 2 A lot of companies will not hire felons, different apartment complexes will not allow felons to rent housing nor will certain parts of the government give assistance regardless of the rehabilitations that has been acquired. Being released to Charleston, S.C., in 2008; I was given the right to vote.
Whether it is through a newspaper, television, magazines or talk radio, people will always communicate through some type of medium. Now, whether or not the mediums are tainted with bias is a question of beliefs. Some people argue that journalism today is rather fair and balanced, while others would vehemently oppose that view by saying that bias is definitely prevalent in news media and other mediums today. In some instances, there lies the belief that the fairness doctrine should be reestablished in order to mend the problem of bias; however, many would strenuously fight that by arguing that such an act would destroy the freedom of the press guaranteed under the first amendment. Another argument surrounding this issue is the expectation of journalists to be as objective to each issue as possible.
However, Parliament is sovereign and civil rights and liberties have been put suspended but only in the interests of law and order or national security. Unlike many other democracies, the government retains control over rights and freedoms of citizens. Democracy can lead to the abuse of power and there are fears that if those who govern are left to their own devices, they may claim substantial amounts of power and begin to abuse their position. By making governments accountable to the people, this can be prevented. Governments must submit themselves regularly to re-election and by guaranteeing that they are controlled by elected representatives, the people can feel safe from the corruption of power.
I’ll be using the same article in the next section, because he then informs his readers how to identify when a news corporation is considered bias. First, Entman states that “most of the studies that do explicitly explore bias focus on presidential campaigns and administrations and find little evidence of decisive or consistent, liberal or conservative, Democratic or Republican bias, but yet this still sits uneasily alongside other findings that reveal news consistently favoring one side and seem to not be considered “bias”, but slanted.” ( Entman 2003) The best definition of power is the ability to get others to do what one wants, in order for a news corporation to disperse the power they wish to different issues, or in this case, political views, they use what is called
LSTD503 Criminal Justice Process THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE: A NEED FOR CHANGE Sophia D. Flowers-Hollis Spring 2014 The Exclusionary Rule: A Need for Change The exclusionary rule has been a highly debated topic within our legal system as it has come into conflict with potential evidence that could possibly convict an individual to a jail sentence. Those who are against the exclusionary act believe that the act has no power in stopping unwarranted searches anyway and what the rule mainly does is let criminals go. Those who are for the exclusionary rule say that this is a protective right and is a right that is guaranteed to us through the constitution and should never be taken away. I am against the exclusionary rule. My research paper will argue that the exclusionary rule needs to be changed and although it is a right, federal and certain state laws should not be included with the exclusionary rule.
The Sentences Paper In today’s criminal justice system. Crime is not always solved. The person that commits the crime is not sentenced fairly. The factors that measure the judges and jurors discretions in the sentencing process are governed by the United States constitution. The 18th amendment provides protection to all citizens against unusual sentencing.
We can control our own actions whether they are right or wrong and be held accountability for them. We can teach others from right and wrong. We cannot control the actions of others even if they are good, but we can definitely hold them accountability for the wrong actions. Having more information about the timeline and events of 9-11 makes me wonder if the President would have acted on some of the information would so many people have died that day. President George W. Bush declared, “Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America.
This principle applies regardless of whether the medical care is provided by governmental employees or by private medical staff under contract with the government. Restrictions on prisoners’ access to publications cannot be arbitrary; they must be “reasonably related to legitimate penological interests.” That said, in practice, courts often will accept the judgment of prison authorities in deciding whether censoring a publication is reasonable. Over the last two decades corrections systems have increasingly relied on solitary confinement as a prison management tool – even building entire institutions called “supermax prisons” where prisoners are held in conditions of extreme isolation, sometimes for years or decades. But solitary confinement jeopardizes our public safety, is fundamentally inhumane and wastes taxpayer dollars. We must insist on humane and more cost-effective methods of punishment and prison management.