Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Supreme court cases quizlet
Supreme court cases quizlet
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Supreme court cases quizlet
Nix V. Hedden As humans, we have pointless arguments over things that do not matter. For example: currently, many people all over the world are arguing over whether or not water is wet. No one really cares about the true answer. It is just something to talk about. Well, meaningless arguments have always been a thing to do, but no one ever expected anything like a friendly argument to go to the Supreme Court. In 1893, a case made it all the way to the Supreme Court which argued over whether a tomato is a fruit or a vegetable (Caitlin Dewey, The Washington Post.com). Personally, I have always considered a tomato a vegetable, but technically the seeds are enclosed inside of the plant so would that make it a fruit? In 1887, a case was filed and eventually made it the the Supreme Court in 1893 (Caitlin Dewey, The Washington Post.com). The case was whether a tomato is a fruit or vegetable. This case was first brought up because a ten percent tariff tax on imported vegetables upon their arrival of the United States of America (Caitlin Dewey, The Washington Post.com). John Nix and Company, owned by John Nix and his four sons, was a Manhattan wholesaler (Caitlin Dewey, The Washington Post.com). The company became upset when they had to pay the ten percent tariff tax on tomatoes. They …show more content…
Is it not? The question has technically been answered. It is both, but as humans, we all have that need to argue. I am sure that we will always argue over pointless topics. Whether is is about water being wet, Pillow-pets are stuffed animals or pillows, or tomatoes being fruits or vegetables. It is not a huge deal as long as it does not get out of hand. I understand that there was a point behind the tomato argument, but it is still mind-blowing that a case about a plant made it all the way to the Supreme Court. Burpee’s George Ball summed it up perfectly He said, “Are tomatoes fruits? Of course, Are they vegetables? You bet”(Caitlin Dewey, The Washington
Why was the case brought? Give a detailed summary of the factors that led to the case (250 words).
Facts: Rex Marshall testified that the deceased came into his store intoxicated, and started whispering things to his wife. The defendant stated that he ordered the deceased out of the store immediately, however the deceased refused to leave and started acting in an aggressive manner; by slamming his hate down on the counter. He then reached for the hammer, the defendant states he had reason to believe the deceased was going to hit him with the hammer attempting to kill him. Once the deceased reached for the hammer the defendant shot him almost immediately.
The initial rule pertaining to this case, as seen in New York v. Belton, was that
McLaughlin v. Heikkila is a case that involves Wilbert Heikklia and David Mc Laughlin who entered into an agreement involving eight parcels to be sold to Mr. Mc Laughlin by Mr. Heikklia. According to Cheeseman (2013), the facts of the case indicate that Mr. Mc Laughlin submitted offers to Mr. Heikklia for the purchase of three parcels and afterwards, McLaughlin submitted earnest-money checks and three printed purchase agreements to Heikklia. According to the Minnesota Court of Appeals, McLaughlin himself never signed any of the agreements. However, his wife did sign two of the agreements and she initiated the third agreement on September 14, 2003. Then, two days later on September 16, 2003 Heikklia made changes to two of the agreements by increasing the cost of the parcels, and he changed the closing dates on all three agreements, including add a reservation of mineral rights to all three (Minnesota Court of Appeals, 2005).
Wallace v. Jaffree. United States Supreme Court. 4 June 1985. Find Law. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 May 2014.
There have been many, many court cases throughout the history of the United States. One important case that I believe to be important is the court case of Clinton v. New York. This case involves more than just President Bill Clinton, the City of New York. It involved Snake River Farmers’ as well. This case mostly revolves around the president’s power of the line item veto.
There were several cases that led the Supreme Court justices to making their decision in Sweatt v.
Stuart v. Nappi was class lawsuit Stuart’s mother filed against school personnel and the Danbury Board of Education because she claimed that her daughter was not receiving the rights granted in the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA). Kathy Stuart was a student at Danbury High School in Connecticut with serious emotional, behavior, and academic difficulties. She was suppose to be in special education classes, but for some reason she hardly ever attended them. Kathy was involved in a school-wide disturbance. As a result of her complicity in these disturbances, she received a ten-day disciplinary suspension and was scheduled to appear at a disciplinary hearing. The Superintendent of Danbury Schools recommended to the Danbury Board of Education
Blackburn was candid that most of his clients were “in the (drug) life at some level” and many of them had prior arrests. For instance, Billy Wafer, was on probation for possession of marijuana at the time when he was accused of selling cocaine to Coleman. “I ain’t an angel but I’ve never sold drugs,” said Wafer. Wafer, unlike most of the other defendants, had his charges dropped because he had a rock solid alibi with time cards from his job. Also, his supervisor testified verifying he was at work when Coleman claimed he sold him cocaine.
Faragher v. City of Boca Raton case was taken in by the Supreme Court of the United States on June 26, 1988. The case was brought up by Beth Ann Faragher, whom between 1985 and 1990, worked as a lifeguard for the City of Boca Raton, Florida. During these years, Faragher stated the two male supervisors, Bill Terry and David Silverman, performed several acts of sexual harassment against her, and several other female lifeguards. These acts ranged from sexual comments about these women’s bodies to asking them to engage in sexual intercourse with them. The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in favor of the City of Boca Raton under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that an employer may only be held responsible, if supervisory employees
Clear and Danger was evaluated in the First Amendment and guarantees the right of Freedom of Speech. I have two scenarios regarding clear and danger, the first scenario is Debs v United States. In this case Debs v United States, Debs felt that socialism is the answer; however, Deb’s was prosecuted for the remarks that he made. In addition, the speech that Deb gave wasn’t as harsh as made by others, for example, George McGovern made a remark about the Viet Nam War during his 1972 presidential bid which was very harsh. This process was done by using its weak form of the clear-and-present-danger test and Deb’s ended up being sentenced to a ten year sentence. In this case Deb’s couldn’t speak everything on his mind that he wanted which was a violation
This case deals with the Defendant's possession of a firearm while under a restraining order, and the charges incurred by the Defendant for such firearm possession. Under Texas law, the possession of a firearm by Mr. Emerson creates a perceivable threat to members of his family, thus creating a violation of the restraining order against him. Apparently common practice in Texas, the restraining order was filed by Mr. Emerson's wife in conjunction with the papers filed for divorce. The restraining order sought to enjoin Emerson from "engaging in various financial transactions to maintain the financial status quo and from making threatening communications or actual attacks upon his wife during the pendency of the divorce proceedings" (United 1). Under Texas law, unbeknownst to Mr. Emerson, the possession of a firearm during the time period of the restraining order constituted a direct violation of the restraining order, and Mr. Emerson was indicted on charges of such violation.
After many more suits were filed oral arguments in Bush v. Gore were brought before the US Supreme Court on December 11, 2000 by lawyers representing both sides. Due to the nature of the case the court gave its opinion in only 16 hours after hearing the arguments.
Perhaps no contemporary issue inspires more heated debate than abortion - the deliberate termination of a pregnancy. Many have witnessed and experienced the bitterness of such a controversial debate. There are two types of people in this world. Pro - choice activists believe in the right to choose a safe, legal abortion. Pro - life activists believe that abortion is murder. Why is the debate over abortion so emotional? Some argue about the rights of the fetus (unborn child) while others argue if abortion should be legal. The debate usually strays from these basic issues. For example, pro - choice advocates try to convince their opponents women's rights are at risk. Pro - life supporters argue that the rights of the fetus are as important as those of the mother, and that abortion is murder. "Other pro - choice defenders argue that if abortion is murder, why do so many pro - life advocates fight against the most logical methods of preventing this so - called genocide - birth control and sex education?" (Reardon, 138) Another reason for the bitterness of this debate is that most pro - choice and pro - life advocates reached their conclusions about abortion very early in life, probably even earlier than they can remember. They were taught from previous generations that there was only one correct point of view. Many people have trouble seeing why others who were brought up with the opposite viewpoint cannot simply look at the "facts" and be persuaded to change their minds. Tempers flare when opponents resort to oversimplification because the issue is definitely not simple.
We all love to get our point across. It doesn’t matter if I’m in the middle of an argument and I realize that I’m wrong, I’m going to continue and argue that my point is correct. All of us want to be right whether it’s about what Avogadro’s number is or if my friend believes that I filed my taxes the wrong way. Some arguments that we have obviously have a right or wrong answer, for example, it is a known FACT that two plus two equals four. There is no way around, no matter what type of calculus you may want to bring into the argument, two plus two in four. If you think otherwise, I will gladly discuss your lack of intellectual agility or we can just let it be-it’s completely up to you. Anyways, there comes a time in life where we have to realize when to just be in silence is sometimes what you have to do to come to a common