More handpicked essays just for you.
Analysis of the first amendment
Essays over the first amendment
The importance of the First Amendment in the United States
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Miller vs. California There have been many Supreme Court cases that dealed with many concepts of the law, like obscenity for example. As a matter of fact, obscenity is a concept that Miller v. California deals with. To be more specific, this case deals with what is considered obscene, and if the specific obscenity mentioned in this case is protected by the first amendment, the freedom of speech. I will now explain this case in more depth. What brought this case about? In 1973, Marvin Miller, operator of one of the West Coast's largest mail-order businesses dealing in sexually explicit material, had conducted a mass mailing campaign to advertise the sale of illustrated books, which was known as “adult material”. He was found guilty based on the fact that he violated California’s pena...
In the controversial court case, McCulloch v. Maryland, Chief Justice John Marshall’s verdict gave Congress the implied powers to carry out any laws they deemed to be “necessary and proper” to the state of the Union. In this 1819 court case, the state of Maryland tried to sue James McCulloch, a cashier at the Second Bank of the United States, for opening a branch in Baltimore. McCulloch refused to pay the tax and therefore the issue was brought before the courts; the decision would therefore change the way Americans viewed the Constitution to this day.
The Case of Arizona v. Hicks took place in 1986; the case was decided in 1987. It began on April 18th 1984, with a bullet that was shot through the floor in Hick’s apartment; it had injured a man in the room below him. An investigation took place. Officers were called to the scene. They entered Mr. Hicks’ apartment and discovered three weapons and a black stocking mask.
Laci Peterson, a 27-year-old wife who was eight months pregnant, disappeared on December 24, 2002. When the body of the California woman and her unborn child were found four months later, her husband, Scott, was charged with two counts of murder. Detective Craig Grogan gave a sworn statement that he had probable cause to believe Mr. Peterson committed two counts of the crime of 187 Penal Code, homicide, on or about December 23, 2002 or December 24,2002, in the county of Stanislaus. April 17, 2003 at 0658 hours the Judge of the Superior Court in Stanislaus County, California issued a warrant for the arrest of Scott Lee Peterson. The court found that the District Attorney’s office did, in fact, have probable cause to bring Scott Peterson in. The Judge specifically addressed bail in the warrant. No bail was granted. April 18, 2003 at 1110 hours, Scott Peterson was arrested at the Torrey Pines Golf Course, in Sand Diego County, California. At the time of his arrest, Peterson had colored his hair blonde, grown a beard and mustache, and was carrying $15,000.00 in cash. During his arrest police also discovered that Peterson’s car was full of camping and survival equipment. Peterson was arrested less than 20 minutes from the Mexican border. Peterson waived booking in San Mateo County, California, and was transferred back to Stanislaus County, California, where he was formally booked by the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department.
It is our conclusion that there is today no factual justification for immunity in a case such as this, and that the principles of law, logic and intrinsic justice demand that the mantle of humanity must be withdrawn.” (Parker v. Port Huron Hospital, Michigan)
Escobedo v. Illinois (1964) was a landmark case ruled by the Supreme Court that helped ensure American citizens are receiving the rights granted in the Bill of Rights. The importance of this Court case is not its use as a long standing precedent since it was only used as a precedent for a few years before being eclipsed. The true standing of the case comes from its ability to create a foundation from which other cases such as Miranda v. Arizona (1966) were able to be ruled on. The case helped form a true definition for exactly what the Bill of Rights is granting peoples who have been arrested since prior the case many states were disregarding the constitutional protections that citizens were supposed to have. The Sixth Amendment merely states that there is a right to counsel, but the amendment was never clear when exactly the right kicks in. Escobedo v. Illinois (1964) allowed the Supreme Court to finally set the limit that has persisted to this modern day in order to prevent citizens from self-incrimination and inhibit blatant police misconduct. The Bill of Rights is meaningless and empty without the Supreme Court’s judgments and definitions of each word the framers of the constitution carefully selected to put in the document since the states would not be bound to obey it unless the Supreme Court had connected it to the states. The case acted as one of those moments in which the Supreme Court was able to recognize a flaw in the American judicial system and set a precedent that states must obey or else receive repercussions from the United States federal government since they are the top Court in all the land. Escobedo v. Illinois (1964) is a landmark case because it set a constitutional and judicial precedent that create...
California was heard by the Supreme Court, Riley stated that a smartphone and whatever it may contain does not provide a threat to police officers, therefore People v. Diaz does not apply. Jeffrey L. Fisher, a Stanford University law professor, served as Riley’s representation (Riley v. California, n.d.). He boiled his argument down to the searching of a cell phone is nothing more than an invasion of privacy, as most people now have their entire life on their personal devices (Liptak, 2014).
Defendant Freddie Lee Hall filed a motion to declare Florida Statute 921.137 (Florida Statute) as contrary to Atkins v. Virginia (2002) and, thus, unconstitutional. Hall, convicted in 1981 for the murder of Karol Hurst, was initially sentenced to death in September 1982. For three years, he fought his sentence, filing “a motion to vacate, a petition for writ of habeas corpus and an application for a stay of execution, all of which were denied” . In 1986, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals heard his appeal and reversed part of the lower court’s ruling, a decision granted when the court found Hall “entitled to a hearing on the issues of his absence from the courtroom and whether he deliberately bypassed his ineffective assistance of counsel claim” .
FACTS= On September 24, 1987, Keith Jacobson was indicted on charges of violating a provision of the Child Protection Act of 1984, which criminalizes the knowing receipt through mail of a “visual depiction [that] involves the use of minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct.” On Feb 1984 Jacobson ordered two magazines in the mail of young boys. The magazines entitled Bare Boys 1 and Bare Boys 2, contained material of nude young boys from preteen to teens. Jacobson claimed that he want to order material of 18 year olds and up. However Jacobson’s receipt of the magazines was legal under both federal and Nebraska laws. Laws were constructed three months after the order was filled that banned all sexual depictions of children. Soon after the Gov. started setting up Jacobson by sending him applications to phony organizations that were illegally based.
Pornography Under The Federal Sentencing Guidelines In The United States. Law & Contemporary Problems, 76(1), 27-52.
A sample of inmates released during this period was drawn from a list obtained from the Florida Department of Correction, for a total sample of roughly 3,793 offenders. Careful attention was given to securing a representative sample from each offense group. The offenders chosen were released from public and private state prisons after expiration of their sentences. The centralized idea of this study was to determine the differentiation between public and private state prisons focusing on recidivism. I have chosen two cases that reflect on the central issue of this topic and how they are treated by the Courts which can hopefully shed some light on the research problem as it exists in present society. These cases are based on California's legislative system which relate to the problem of recidivism in Florida.
Let’s Put Pornography Back in the Closet” is an persuasive essay written by Susan Brown Miller stating and giving her reasons on why she thinks pornography should be removed from all the shelves in America. She goes on to state what kind of influence porn has negatively on society, and how it’s no good in our society to persuade readers that pornography should be taken off of public shelves. In her article, she does state very valid points and substantial reasons why pornography should be removed from shelves. But also, she does sound a lot like a person who is very critical of something that she believes is wrong morals wise because that’s how she was raised perhaps. Some of the methods she uses are the analogy method, quantitative method, and some emotional appeal as well. She also has some unsupported generalizations that she had made up herself. Either way, there were a few instances to where I was completely against with Miller’s arguments, but they were outweighed by the instances where I did agree with Miller. In all, this essay persuades me to support her opinion on pornography being taken out the public shelves because of the valid reasons and points that she used to support her opinion.
Leis, C.L. (2001). United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc. – Sexually Explicit Signal Bleed and §505 of the CDA: Unable to Overcome Strict Scrutiny but Will Strict Scrutiny be Able to Overcome the Future?. Unpublished manuscript, Capital University Law School, Columbus, OH. Retrieved from https://culsnet.law.capital.edu/LawReview/BackIssues/30-4/Leis.pdf
In her essay “Let’s Put Pornography Back in the Closet,” Susan Brownmiller, a prominent feminist activist, argues that pornography should not be protected under the First Amendment (59). Her position is based on the belief that pornography is degrading and abusive towards women (Brownmiller 59). She introduces the reader to the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment, and explains how it relates to her beliefs on censoring pornographic material (Brownmiller 58). In addition, she provides examples of First Amendment controversies such as Miller v. California and James Joyce’s Ulysses to explain how the law created a system to define pornographic material (Brownmiller 58). She described the system that used a three-part test as confusing (Brownmiller 58). Regardless of whether or not the First Amendment was intended to protect obscenities, she and many others believe that the legislatures should have the final say in the decision of creating and publishing pornography (Brownmiller 60).
The emergence of new and innovative technology can be used in many deceitful or secretive ways by law enforcement agencies to convict a suspect. The Fourth Amendment of the Bill of Rights has had a large influence in regulating the ways that law enforcement agencies may use technology against the everyday citizen. Technology can be used to obtain information on an individual without the individual being aware of the invasion of their privacy: e-mail accounts can be hacked, IP addresses can be traced, phones can be tapped and tracked, cars can be bugged.
A real life example of the link between the onset of pornography in American culture and sexual crimes includes a survey done in 1978, in which 44% of the nine hun...