Thursday, February 13, 2014

Blog 5

1. A Supreme Court that demonstrates a willingness to change public policy and alter judicial precedent is said to be engaging in

a) judicial activism
b) due process
c) judicial restraint
d) ex post facto lawmaking
e) judicial review

The answer is A because an judicial activism means that the Court is engaged and determined in promoting change in policy, instead of referring to the Constitution.

2. A writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court indicates that the Court
a) Will review a lower decision
b) Has rendered a decision on a case
c) Has decided not to hear an appeal
d) Will recess until the end of the calendar year
e) Plans to overturn one of its previous rulings

The answer is A because the definition of Certiorari  is when the Court orders a lower court to deliver its records so that they can review it.


3. The Supreme Court holds original jurisdiction in all of the following types of cases EXCEPT
a) If the United States is a party in the case
b) In controversies in criminal law between a citizen and a state
c) In controversies under the Constitution, federal laws, or treaties
d) if a case is between citizens of different states
e) If cases arise under admirality and maritime laws

The answer is B because in those cases the state/ federal courts have original Jurisdiction, not the Supreme court. 

4. All of the following are specifically mentioned in the Constitution EXCEPT
a) judicial review
b) the national census
c) rules of impeachment
d) the State of the Union address
e) length of term if federal judgeships

The answer is A because Judicial review is an implied power, not explicit.This was decided in the Mardbury vs Madison case ruling.  

5. Which of the following correctly states the relationship between the federal and state judiciaries?
a) Federal courts are higher courts than state courts and may overturn state decisions on any grounds.
b)The two are entirely autonomous, and neither ever hears cases that originate in the other.
c) The two are generally autonomous, although federal courts may rule on the constitutionality of state court decisions.
d) State courts are trial courts; federal courts are appeals courts.
e) State courts try all cases except those that involve conflicts between two states, which are tried in federal courts.

The answer is C because federal courts need to make sure that state courts keep their decisions constitutional.

6. The Supreme Court’s decision in Miranda v. Arizona was based mainly on the
a) Constitutional prohibition of ex post facto laws
b) Incorporation of the Fifth Amendment through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
c) Eighth Amendment restriction against cruel and unusual punishment
d) Abolition of slavery by the Fourteenth Amendment
e) full faith and credit clause of the Constitution

The answer is B because  the police didn't tell Miranda that he had a right to an attorney and no self-incrimination.Under the Fifth Amendment, this was the police's duty.

7. The Supreme Court has used the practice of selective incorporation to
a) Limit the number of appeals filed by defendants in state courts
b) Extend voting rights to racial minorities and womenc) apply most Bill of Rights protections to state law
d) Hasten the integration of public schools
e) Prevent the states from calling a constitutional convention

The answer is B because initially the bill of rights was bound to the federal government, but not the states, which caused problems in racially and gender oppressive states. 

8. Which of the following cases extended the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures to the states?
a) Gideon v. Wainwright
b) Schneck v. United States
c) Miranda v. Arizona
d) Mapp v. Ohio
e) Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States

The answer is D because Mapp vs Ohio because in this court case is when they ruled under the Fourth Amendment that this act was unreasonable without a search warrant.

9. Which of the following is true of court cases in which one private party is suing another?
A) They are tried in civil court
B) The federal court system has exclusive jurisdiction over them
C) They are tried in criminal court
D) The state court system has exclusive jurisdiction over them.
E) They are tried before a grand jury.

The answer is A because this case they would be tried in a civil court.

10. Which of the following is an accurate statement about the federal court system?
a) The creation of new federal courts requires a constitutional amendment
b) The creation of new federal courts requires the unanimous consent of all 50 states
c) The Supreme Court has the sole power to create new federal courts.
d) Congress had the power to create new federal courts
e) The number of federal courts if fixed by the Constitution and cannot be changed.

The answer is D because the Constitution grants Congress to create new Federal courts under Article I sec 8. 


Wednesday, February 12, 2014

Blog 4

1. Brown vs. Board of Education (1954)

  • In the Brown vs. Board of Education case of 1954, the Supreme Court ruled that state laws establishing public schools that separate black and white people to be unconstitutional. The Court ruled that this law was a direct violation of Equal Protection Clause of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. This decision overruled the court rule during the Plessy vs. Ferguson case when the Supreme Court ruled supported segregation in public schools stating that it was "separate but equal." This was a historical case and was a huge accomplishment in the Civil Rights Movement. 
  • Judicial Philosophy: This court case is an example of judicial activism because this ruling by the Supreme Court gave black and white people the idea that they are equal and they don't need to be in separate schools because there is no difference. This shows how the Court used its power to make a significant change in our history and to help push the Civil Rights Movement forward. 
  • Personally, I think that the Supreme Court probably wouldn't have taken such action against segregation if it wasn't such a important part in history. The Civil Rights Movement gradually grew and the government must work with the nation as their opinion changes. Although many people did not agree with the ruling of this case, it was an important step that was needed to point our nation in the right direction and have them moving towards a less negative outlook on segregation. 
2. Mapp vs. Ohio (1960)

  • This case was an important case in the criminal procedure for the United States, in this case the Supreme Court ruling decided that evidence received in violation of the Fourth Amendment, this protects citizens from "unreasonable seizures and searches" and it cannot be used in state law criminal prosecutions. In this case Mapp was convicted of having certain items, but her argument is that this information was obtained in an illegal search of her home. 
  • Judicial Philosophy: This court case is an example of judicial restraint because the Court referred to the constitution and used the Fourth Amendment as a basis for their ruling. This limited the Court's power.
  • Although it is nice to have the right to a protection of your items and privacy, once illegal items are found, they are illegal items regardless if they are found under a search warrant or not. I think its an important law that we have so that the police don't abuse the power of being able to search someone. Also, its important to know that someone issued this warrant and saw the reason to do so just like the cop. 
3. Roe vs. Wade
  • In this court case, the Supreme Court ruled that abortion was legal as long as the health and life of the mother were not at risk. This court case was one of the most important cases. In this case it was also decided that states were not allowed to regulate or ban abortion in the first trimester. However, during the second and third trimester the states were only allowed to put laws against abortion that would ensure the protection of the mother and her fetus. 
  • Judicial Philosophy: This court case is an example of judicial activism because instead of turning to the Constitution as a basis of this ruling, the Court overruled a previous decision that abortion was illegal. In this court case the Court ruled a decision that would be better for the people.
  • I believe that everyone has the right to make their own decisions and it is not up to anyone but the person to decide what they want to do with their own body. However, I also feel that it is wrong to take the life of any person, even if its just a fetus, to me that is the same idea as taking someones life. Abortion is a serious decision and sometimes the woman dealing with this decision needs to make it, not because she wants to, but because she has to make the right decision for herself and her baby. I'm glad that the Court left this up to the woman to decide, instead of leaving it as illegal. 




Monday, February 10, 2014

Blog 3

Initially when I saw this cartoon, I thought that the cartoonist was trying to convey that the Supreme Court doesn't do its job and fails to use the Constitution effectively in order to bring justice in certain cases such as Plessy vs. Ferguson. In this case, the Supreme Court failed to use the Constitution to help alleviate the people of America of segregation stating that the constitutionality of state laws requiring racial segregation in public facilities under the doctrine of "separate but equal." However, after a brief discussion with Ms. Robledo who viewed this cartoon differently, I realized that one can also look at this with a positive attitude towards the Supreme Court in that they are doing their job and making sure the Constitution's values and beliefs are upheld in our nation. An example of this is shown in the Brown vs. Board of Education case when the Supreme Court declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students unconstitutional.

Wednesday, February 5, 2014

Blog #2

Blog entry #2; What are the judicial powers of the US Supreme Court and where does this power come from (specific documents)?


The judicial powers of the US Supreme Court are all cases arising during the Constitution and laws of treaties of the US, all cases of admiralty or mantime jurisdiction, cases in which the US is a party, controversies between tow or more states, controversies between citizens of different states, all cases affecting ambassadors or other public ministers, and controversies between citizens of the sames states claiming lands under grants in different states.

Monday, February 3, 2014

Your very own pass into the life of TH

Hey there fellow blogger,

How are you doing today?

Every stopped for a second to reflect upon yourself and the life that you have life up until this very moment?

No? Thought so.

Sometimes the scariest thing to do is reflect upon yourself, not because you are afraid of who you are, but because it can be scary to admit that you might not be the person you turned out to be.

This is my blog and on this blog I will be hear to reflect upon government and make sure that I make my teacher proud.

But as for now...Here is a short intro..

I go by TH. I am a senior in high school and my future is still unknown to me. Although this scares me, I embrace the uncertainty and wish to own the uncertainty. I have a problem with thinking too much, but this sometimes works in my favor. I've never had a blog...but somehow this seems perfect because I talk to myself in my head all the time.

Maybe it was about time I started writing down my thoughts on paper...

Well, that's about it for now. Hope y'all have a splendid day.

Make sure to tune in for more.

XOXO TH