Major Civil Liberties Cases
This is an excerpt from the paper...
In the book In Our defense, authors Ellen Alderman and Caroline Kennedy make reference to a number of major civil liberties cases as they illustrate the power and importance of the Bill of Rights. The government is prevented by the Constitution from engaging in a wide variety of behaviors which the Founding Fathers feared, based on their experience in Europe with an unfettered government. While majority rules, it is also true that the Constitution protects the rights of the minority against the onslaught of the majority. The bill of Rights involves a statement of such protections, as an examination of some of the cases cited will show. The Progressive magazine case is an interesting one in which the magazine was going to print an article detailing the production of an atomic bomb, specifically an H-bomb. The government was attempting what is known as prior restraint, which is a court order that would be able to stop the publication of something. Our society places a high value on freedom of speech and of the press. We recognize that the press can make errors and commit offenses as can anyone else, and we have developed case law and legislation that addresses such issues. However, the law is supposed to come into play to address abuses after those abuses have been committed, not before. Prior restraint turns this idea on its head and in effect says that a crime is about to be committed and stops it before it is. Prior restraint is a form of censorship.
. . .
hment. In the case of Tison v. Arizona, three brothers were sentenced to death for murder and appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court considered not merely whether the crime warranted the death penalty but whether the criminal did. The underlying issue is referred to as society's evolving standards of decency, meaning that what might be acceptable at one time might not at another. The court held that two of the brothers did not intend to kill as that term is usually used in criminal law, so the Court asked whether the state could execute a person who did not kill, attempt to kill, or intend to kill. The Court decided five to four that the state could execute a person under these conditions. The reason was that under the law there is something known as "reckless indifference," meaning that even though the individual did not intend to kill, he or she might have a reasonable expectation that the actions taken could cause someone's death. The trial court now had to decide whether the brothers had shown such "reckless indifference." The two boys were prosecuted under a statute holding them liable for murder even though they had not killed anyone because they were involved in committing a felony with the third brother, who
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Founding Fathers, Court Court, Fourth Amendment, Supreme Court, Bill Rights, Engblom Carey, Fiona Hobson, OJ Simpson, COINTELPRO FBI, Caroline Kennedy, bill rights, prior restraint, intend kill, reckless indifference, founding fathers, importance bill rights, government believed, constitution authors, specific requirements, quartering troops, people targeted,
Approximate Word count = 1624
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Major Civil Liberties Cases
|