Were the issues before the Supreme Court were culture war issues in the last part of the 20th century?
What was last issued in the 15th century?
The last papal bull authorizing an inquisition was issued during the 15th century. Among other things, three English coins, the angel (gold, 80 pence), the noble (silver, 80 pence) and the rose noble or ryal (gold, 10 shillings) were last issued in the 15th century. We could probably produce a long …list. (MORE)
Has the US Supreme Court ever reversed itself on a major constitutional issue?
Yes, on the issue of racial segregation. In Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, it ruled that public facilities could be segregated along racial lines as long as the facilities were equal for both. One restroom for whites and another for blacks. In 1954, it overruled Plessy in Brown v. Board of Education by… ruling that "separate" is inherently unequal, and therefore unconstitutional under the equal protection clause. In that case it was one school for whites and another for blacks. (MORE)
How did the Supreme Court rule on labor issues?
At what point in history? The US Supreme Court has changed its stance on labor laws and workplace protection a number of times.
Who is the last Star Wars deagostini issue?
The DeAgostini Star Wars Fact File has currently published 140issues. The very last issue of the Fact File was released in 2004.
Which 20th century US President appointed the most US Supreme Court justices?
Franklin Delano Roosevelt appointed eight justices to the US Supreme Court. If Roosevelt's draft legislation had passed Congress, he would have been able to appoint one additional justice for each sitting justice over the age of 70.5, up to a maximum of six, for a potential total Court size of 15. …The Legislative branch has the constitutional authority to determine the size of the Supreme Court, however, and correctly recognized Roosevelt's plan as an attempt to pack the Court with justices favorable to his New Deal legislation. (MORE)
What types of written opinions may the US Supreme Court issue?
Written Opinions The four most common opinions: .
Majority .
Concurring .
Dissenting .
Per Curiam The Court's Opinion (usually also the majority opinion ) is synonymous with the Court's decision. The "Opinion of the Court" gives the verdict and explains the reasoning behind the decisi…on reached. The privilege of writing the official opinion falls to the most senior justice in the majority group, or to the Chief Justice if he voted with the majority; this person may choose to write the opinion, or may assign the task to another member of the majority. If the justices who voted against the majority wish to issue a unified opinion, they simply decide amongst themselves who will write it. Individual justices may write their own opinions, usually concurring or dissenting , regardless of whether they agree with the majority. Justices may also "join" or sign any other written opinion they agree with, even if they agree with more than one point-of-view. This generally strengthens the opinion. All published opinions except Per Curiam decisions may be used as precedent in future litigation. .
Opinion of the Court - The official opinion, whether unanimous or by majority vote .
Majority opinion - Also called the "Opinion of the Court," this is the official verdict in the case that represents the vote of the majority of justices .
Plurality opinion - A concurring opinion joined by more justices than the official Court opinion .
Dissenting opinion - An opinion written by a justice who disagrees with the majority .
Dissenting in part - An opinion written by a justice who voted with the majority on the decision, but disagrees with a portion of the reasoning in the majority opinion, which he or she explains in writing .
Unanimous opinion - An opinion authored by one justice, often (but not always) the Chief Justice, and signed by all justices .
Concurring opinion - An opinion that agrees with the decision but may disagree with the some of the reasoning behind the Court opinion, or may elaborate on a point made or introduce further relevant information .
Concurring in part - Typically an opinion written by a justice who voted against the majority, but agrees with a portion of the majority opinion, which he or she explains in writing .
Concurring in judgment - An opinion written by a justice who agrees with the decision, but not with the reasoning used to reach the decision .
Concurring in part and dissenting in part - An opinion written by a justice who may have voted either way, but wants to explain which points are in agreement and which are in disagreement. .
Per Curiam opinion: The opinion is given by the full court, unsigned by the Justices .
Seriatim opinion: Each justice on the Court writes his or her own, separate opinion; there is no majority opinion, only a majority verdict. This type of opinion was more common in the 18th, and parts of the 19th, centuries The most important type is the majority opinion. The majority opinion is, as the name suggests, the opinion of the majority of judges hearing the case. In most cases, a majority opinion requires five Justices, unless one or more Justices have recused themselves from a given decision. The majority opinion is important because it defines the precedent that all future courts hearing a similar case should follow. Majority opinions are sometimes accompanied by concurring opinions. Concurring opinions are written by individual Justices in the majority. These opinions agree with the majority opinion, but may stress a different point of law. Sometimes, concurring opinions will agree with the result reached by the majority, but for a different reason altogether. Opinions written by justices not in the majority are known as dissenting opinions. Dissenting opinions are important because they provide insight into how the Court reached its decision. Sometimes the court issues so many separate opinions that whichever opinion is joined by the most justices is referred to as a plurality , rather than a majority. One recent example of a decision holding a plurality opinion is that of Baez et al., v. Rees (2008), where Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Kennedy and Alito signed one opinion, and Justice Stevens wrote a separate concurring opinion, as did Justices Scalia, Breyer, and Thomas (Scalia also joined Thomas' concurrence). Justice Ginsberg wrote a dissenting opinion in which Justice Souter joined. There are also a number of cases where members of the majority each wrote a concurring opinion, without creating a unified majority or plurality opinion, as well as cases where the court decision was released without the signature of any justice, in an anonymous fashion. This latter form is known as a per curiam decision. Bush v. Gore (2000) is a recent example. Cases decided per curiam do not create a precedent that can be cited in future litigation. Plurality and per curiam decisions tend to create confusion as to how a federal or constitutional law is to be interpreted. (MORE)
How did the Supreme Court apply the Bill of Rights to the slavery issue?
they made an agreement. there was acertian degrees to slave statesand free states. the nourth is the free states and the south is theslave states.
Does the US Supreme Court have the right to issue a writ of mandamus?
Yes. The US Supreme Court has discretionary authority to issue writs of mandamus when the case falls under their jurisdiction. Supreme Court Rules, Rule 20, outlines the conditions under which the Court may issue such a writ. A Writ of Mandamus (Latin, "we command"), classified as an Extraordina…ry Writ, is an order compelling a public official, corporate officer, or agency to take a specified action within their scope of responsibility. For more information, see Related Links and Related Questions, below. (MORE)
When the US Supreme Court rules on a constitutional issue is the judgment final?
Not entirely. There have been many cases of judicial review that has been overturned. One noted example is the idea of "separate but equal", the legal argument for segregation of whites and minorities. However, it took almost a century for this to be overturned so in a single lifetime the judgment c…ould be final. Added: The initial answer has the element of truth to it, but it is not made clear that Supreme Court decisions can only be reversed by subsequent Supreme Court decisions. Decisions of the US Supreme Court are final and binding, and cannot be overturned by any other body of Government. (MORE)
Most cases heard by the Supreme Court involve what type of issues?
The Supreme Court reviews cases involving "federal questions," meaning issues of federal and constitutional law or US treaties. Most cases involve constitutional interpretation.
Will the issue of same-sex marriage come before the Supreme Court?
Yes, look for a SCOTUS ruling on the constitutionality of California's Proposition 8 and section 3 of DOMA likely to come in June 2013.
Does the Constitution give the US Supreme Court original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus?
Yes, but only in the limited class of cases for which the Constitution grants the Supreme Court original (trial) jurisdiction. Writs of mandamus (orders compelling an official or office to take - or refrain from taking - an action required by law) can only be issued under original, not appellate, …jurisdiction. The Constitution defines the scope of the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction to include only those people or entities listed in Article III, Section 2: Article III, Section 2 .
Section 2. The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects. .
In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make. In Marbury v. Madison, (1803), Chief Justice John Marshall decided the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction did not extend US federal government officials, declaring Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional and rendering it null and void. For more information on Marbury v. Madison, see Related Questions, below. (MORE)
Does the US Supreme Court have the power to issue executive orders?
No. Only the President of the United States, or the Vice-President, if the President is incapacitated, has the Constitutional authority to issue "executive orders." The President is the head of the Executive branch of government.
How many decisions did the Supreme Court issue in the 2005-2006 term?
The US Supreme Court issued: 87 Opinions in the 2005-2006 Term 75 Opinions in the 2006-2007 Term 73 Opinions in the 2007-2008 Term 83 Opinions in the 2008-2009 Term These numbers do not include In Chamber Opinions and other motions, but do include Per Curiam decisions.
Why is the US Supreme Court split on such issues as school prayers and the death penalty?
The Court is split because some of the justices are conservative, believing the Constitution is not intended to ban school prayer and capital punishment, while others are progressive, believing school prayer is a violation of the First Amendment Establishment Clause, and the death penalty is a viola…tion of the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. The Supreme Court's inability to agree on Constitutional interpretation speaks to two issues: 1) The Constitution is deliberately vague on the meaning of Amendments in the Bill of Rights; and 2) Supreme Court justices, being human, view the intent of the document through the filter of their personal ideologies. (MORE)
What issues usually involve US Supreme Court decisions based on the First Amendment?
The First Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution that help protect the rights of citizens and the states. There have been many Supreme Court cases interpreting the degree of freedom and protection afforded to people balanced against the interests of the… government. Amendment I "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." Schenck v. United States, (1919), was the first real challenge to laws impinging on First Amendment guarantees. Charles Schenck, a member of the Communist party, was prosecuted for violating the Espionage Act of 1917. Schenck mailed pamphlets to young men urging them to resist WW I recruitment efforts, which the Court held interfered with the United States' ability to build its military. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., who wrote the opinion in Schenck, instituted the "clear and present danger" doctrine that created the first legitimized exception to this constitutional freedom. Examples of Other First Amendment cases Establishment clause: (cannot teach religion in public schools): Everson v. Board of Education, 330 US 1 (1947) Free exercise of religion: Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 US 296 (1940) Freedom of speech: Gitlow v. New York, 268 US 652 (1925) Freedom of the press: Near v. Minnesota, 283 US 697 (1931) Freedom of assembly: DeJonge v. Oregon, 299 US 353 (1937) Expressive association (implied right): NAACP v. Alabama, 357 US 449 (1958) (MORE)
How long does a copyright last for issued before 1978?
It depends on the circumstances. Works published or registered before 1978 currently have a maximum copyright duration of 95 years from the date of publication, if copyright was renewed during the 28th year following publication. If a work was created prior to 1978 but not published until recently c…opyright protection may extent to 2047. As a sidenote works published before 1923 are in the public domain as are works created before 1964 & not properly renewed. (MORE)
What are the four kinds of writs issued by the US Supreme Court?
Writ of Certiorari: (Latin, "informed") An order issued to a lower court to produce the official records for a case the Court intends to review. .
Writ of Habeas Corpus: (Latin, "produce the body") An order forcing a detention facility to bring the accused before the court to determine whether …the detention is legal and justified. .
Writ of Mandamus: (Latin, "we command") An order compelling a public official, corporate officer, or agency to take a specified action within their scope of responsibility. .
Writ of Prohibition: An order prohibiting specified actions or preventing exercise of an entity's legal powers. (MORE)
What issues does the US Supreme Court deal with?
The US Supreme Court primarily hears appeals of cases involving questions of constitutional law. For more information, see Related Questions, below.
What is the decision the Supreme Court makes on an issue?
The Supreme Court of the United States decides the constitutionality (whether it follows the Constitution) of any law that is part of a case being reviewed under their appellate jurisdiction. The decision of the Supreme Court is final.
When does the US Supreme Court issue opinions?
The US Supreme Court releases opinions on Tuesday and Wednesday mornings, and on the third Monday of each sitting. The public is usually alerted a few days prior to an opinion being released, but the specific case name and docket number are kept secret until the formal announcement. This practice ma…y begin as early as October of the new Term and typically ends in late June or early July of the following year. (MORE)
What was the issue in the US Supreme Court case Imbler v. Pachtman?
Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 US 409 (1976) Imbler, a convicted murderer, unsuccessfully petitioned the State of California for a writ of habeas corpus seeking release from prison on the grounds that Pachtman, the state prosecuting attorney, had "knowingly used false testimony and suppressed materia…l evidence at [the] petitioner's [criminal] trial." Failing in the State courts, the petitioner filed a writ of habeas corpus in federal court and was granted release. He then brought suit against Pachtman, personally, under federal code 42 USC § 1983 seeking damages for loss of liberty and deprivation of his constitutional rights. The Court held that the federal code should be read "in harmony with general principles of tort immunities and defenses, rather than in derogation of them," giving the a State prosecuting attorney who acts within the scope of his duties in initiating and pursuing criminal prosecution against a defendant "[absolute immunity] from a civil suit for damages under § 1983 for alleged deprivations of the accused's constitutional rights." You can search US Reports by volume or year at Justia.com, accessible via Related Links, below. (MORE)
What was the constitutional issue that brought US v. Nixon to the Supreme Court?
United States v. Nixon, 418 US 683 (1974) President Nixon refused to give the Special Prosecutor (Leon Jaworski) in the Watergate Scandal tapes of recorded telephone calls between the President and various people implicated in the crime and its cover-up. Nixon attempted to invoke Executive P…rivilege , a constitutional protection allowing the Executive branch to withhold information from the Legislative and Judicial branches, under separation of powers . The Supreme Court held that Nixon had to give Jaworski the tapes, because withholding them interfered with the Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights of the defendants being charged in the case. Nixon's status was considered that of an unindicted conspirator, and that the US Supreme Court had jurisdiction over the case. This decision affirmed one of the Judicial branch's checks on the Executive branch. For more information, see Related Questions, below. (MORE)
What two issues do all US Supreme Court cases deal with?
All US Supreme Court cases address either interpretation and application of federal law and/or the constitutionality of laws and policies, either as written or as applied.
Should the US Supreme Court decide on such issues as the juvenile death penalty?
The answer to this question depends on your on social and political ideology. People who support capital punishment for juveniles may not approve of the Supreme Court having authority to overturn legislation imposing death for crimes committed while a person was under the age of 18, as they did i…n Roper v. Simmons, 543 US 551 (2005). Some might not understand that the Court's decision, which was based on constitutional interpretation, held that imposing the death penalty on this group of offenders was a violation of the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, a decision they were able to make without concern for populist pressure. The ruling in Roper follows a long line of Supreme Court decisions removing the death penalty from cases involving those with extremely low IQs or found guilty of rape or other crimes in the absence of capital murder, as cruel and unusual punishment, an issue Congress chose not to address itself. It also follows a trend in many states toward abolishing capital punishment altogether. Detractors of these decisions are likely to oppose the Supreme Court's right of judicial review, in general, as illegitimate because the power isn't explicitly assigned in the Constitution. Anyone who questions the Founding Fathers' intent with regard to the power of the Judicial branch may consider Alexander Hamilton's words in The Federalist Papers, Number 78, an essay predating constitutional ratification and discussing the role of the judiciary in the United States' tripartite government. Alexander Hamilton Federalist No. 78 [Excerpts]: " The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited Constitution . By a limited Constitution, I understand one which contains certain specified exceptions to the legislative authority; such, for instance, as that it shall pass no bills of attainder, no ex post facto laws, and the like. Limitations of this kind can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void . Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing." and "If it be said that the legislative body are themselves the constitutional judges of their own powers, and that the construction they put upon them is conclusive upon the other departments, it may be answered, that this cannot be the natural presumption, where it is not to be collected from any particular provisions in the Constitution. It is not otherwise to be supposed, that the Constitution could intend to enable the representatives of the people to substitute their will to that of their constituents . It is far more rational to suppose, that the courts were designed to be an intermediate body between the people and the legislature, in order, among other things, to keep the latter within the limits assigned to their authority. The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts. A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute , the intention of the people to the intention of their agents." Hamilton logically asserted that Congress cannot judge the constitutionality of their own laws, because the conflict of interest would prevent them from properly evaluating their decisions in a manner protective of constitutional rights. Judicial review is a check on the power of the Legislative branch, designed to prevent Congress from becoming despotic and controlling government. Judicial review is intended to ensure the other two branches adhere to the Constitution as closely as possible. The system is imperfect and sometimes damaged by application of personal or political bias, but remains the best method for maintaining balance in the Republic. So yes , in my opinion , it is appropriate for the Supreme Court to determine the constitutionality of the juvenile death penalty, whether individuals agree with the specific decision or not. The Supreme Court's role in government is to safeguard the Constitution, the ultimate will of the people, and prevent the other branches from abrogating assured protections. Because all legislation is necessarily tied to political ideology, Supreme Court decisions will always be unpopular with a segment of the population and government. This is an unavoidable product of partisanship, arising from a lack of shared values and goals, and makes the Supreme Court's role in evaluating government policies, such as executing juveniles, all the more important. For more information, see Related Questions, below. (MORE)
How many signatures does the US Supreme Court need to issue a Writ of Certiorari?
At least four of the nine Justices of the Supreme Court must agree to grant a petition for a writ of certiorari. This is called the rule of four . Conversely, five votes are required to determine the outcome of a case after it is heard.
Where does Elena Kagan - Supreme Court nominee - stand on the issues?
That's a difficult question to answer because Kagan has no record of jurisprudence and last appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee when nominated as US Solicitor General, a position advocating the interests of the United States. In her confirmation hearings Kagan successfully convinced the S…enate she would support the government's position on any given case regardless of her personal beliefs about the issue being tried. As nominee for the US Supreme Court, Kagan espouses a constitutional interpretation that respects precedents and opposes judicial activism as a means of promoting social justice. Some progressives are concerned that her beliefs are much more conservative than Justice Stevens' and that she will tilt the court farther to the right. Others cite her intellectual brilliance and strong record of consensus-building, which includes successfully reaching out to conservatives and resolving ideological conflicts. According to bits and pieces gleaned from various relatively centrist sources, Kagan's stand on some of the issues are purportedly as follows: .
Objects to the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy .
As dean of Harvard Law School, attempted to have military recruiters banned from Harvard campus. .
Supported "battlefield law," which would allow indefinite detention of terrorism suspects without benefit of trial .
Believes the death penalty is constitutional .
Disagrees with the use of judicial activism to create a more just society .
On the few occasions she's discussed it, has supported the expansion of Executive (Presidential) power; however, NPR claims evidence suggests she is more opposed to enhanced Executive power than given credit for .
During the Solicitor General confirmation process, answered a written question from the Senate Judiciary committee, "There is no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage." .
In 1997, urged Clinton to ban late term abortions Kagan has shown restraint in expressing personal opinions and has performed competently as Solicitor General, but her lack of judicial experience leaves many questions unanswered. (MORE)
What is the number of writs that can be issued by the Supreme Court of India?
The number of writs that can be prayed for and issued by the Supreme Court and/or a High Court of India is 3.
What days does the US Supreme Court issue decisions?
When the justices are sitting, opinions are usually released on Tuesday and Wednesday mornings, and on the third Monday of each session (no arguments are heard that day). In May and June, when the Court has finished hearing oral arguments for the Term, opinions are often released only once a week, u…sually on Monday, unless Monday is a holiday. (MORE)
How has the supreme court generally respond to press confidentiality issues?
The Supreme Court generally responds to press confidentiality issues by deferring or deflecting them. In most cases, the Supreme Court does not want to respond to issues of press confidentiality.
When can the US Supreme Court decide an issue of state law?
The US Supreme Court only reviews state laws that are relevant to a case before the court if it conflicts with federal law or infringes rights protected by the Constitution. The primary considerations for using judicial nullification to overturn state laws would be: .
if they infringe individual …liberties protected by the Bill of Rights; .
if they conflict with a federal law or treaty; or .
if they usurp a power reserved for a branch of the federal government. The court may also interpret and apply a state law without exercising judicial review, if the statute is part of a case raising a federal question on another matter. The federal courts have authority to hear cases or appeals under concurrent jurisdiction, or when the case involves both federal and state laws. (MORE)
Can a US Supreme Court justice be impeached due to conflict of interest issues?
No. Recusal (disqualifying oneself from a case) for conflict of interest is a voluntary action; justices cannot be penalized for refusing to do so. Unfortunately, this has lead to situations where justices have heard -- and voted on -- cases in which they should not have been involved.
What social issues caused civil unrest in America in the last half of the 20th century?
One social issue that caused civil unrest in American in the lastpart of the 20th century was the right for blacks to attend thesame schools as whites. There was a civil rights movement, afeminist movement, and those who protested the war in Vietnam.
What does the US Supreme Court issue when it accepts a case for review?
The US Supreme Court traditionally issues a writ of certiorari , an order to the lower court to send the records for the case under review. Although the Court still grants and denies certiorari , they seldom issue an actual court order for records anymore; this function is now handled administrati…vely by the Clerk of Court. (MORE)
Why was Lochner vs New York a significant 20th century Supreme Court decision?
It was a major setback for labor unions because it held that government couldn't interfere in relations between businesses and their employees Good Luck on study island guys :))
When the US Supreme Court rules how many opinions can it issue about this one ruling?
There is no mandated limit; however, the practical limit would be nine -- one for each member of the Court. Only one opinion may be submitted as the official opinion of the Court; however, each justice is free to write a dissenting or concurring (or dissenting in part and concurring in part) opin…ion as part of the legal record. While concurring and dissenting opinions are unenforceable, they may be cited as precedent in future cases and sometimes become more influential than the original opinion of the Court. (MORE)
What happens if a dissenting opinion is issued by a justice of the Supreme Court?
Nothing really "happens". It's published along with the majority opinion but doesn't change the majority decision in any way. Unless the Court votes unanimously, there will generally be a dissenting opinion. A justice may even opt to write an opinion "concurring" with the judgment itself, but ind…icating that he has reached the same conclusion via different reasoning, or "concurring in part and dissenting in part" which means he thinks part of the majority opinion is good and part of it is not. It's not uncommon for there to even be three or more opinons published, with various justices agreeing with each other about some parts but disagreeing on others. For example, the majority opinion might be: the decision of the lower court is overturned for Reason 1, Reason 2, and Reason 3. A dissenting opinion may state that the decision should not be overturned at all, and an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part may say that Reason 3 is total hogwash (they generally polite it up a bit, but that's often the general gist... reading Supreme Court opinions is sometimes more entertaining than you might think), but that Reason 1 and Reason 2 are still good, and a fourth opinion might say that Reasons 1, 2, and 3 are all wrong, but the decision should still be overturned because of Reason 4. None of this changes the basic decision itself (to overturn the lower court's ruling) in any way. (MORE)
How did the supreme court fuel tensions over the issue of slavery in 1850?
Well, when i typed in this question to google I didn't want to answer the question, CUZ I DIDN'T KNOW IT, i wanted someone else to help. Gosh, I freaking hate homework.
What does the US Supreme Court issue when they agree to hear an appeal of a case?
The US Supreme Court traditionally issues a writ of certiorari , an order to the lower court to send the records for the case under review. Although the Court still grants and denies certiorari , they seldom issue an actual court order for records anymore; this function is now handled administrati…vely by the Clerk of Court. (MORE)
Is the validity of California's Proposition 8 an issue correctly decided by the US Supreme Court?
The matter is properly decided by the Supreme Court because the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which overturned Proposition 8 as unconstitutional, has refused to review its decision en banc, thereby leaving the United States Supreme Court as the only remaining forum for appeal… (MORE)
What did the us supreme court decide about the civil rights issue in the 1898 Plessy decision?
Upheld the right of Tennessee (and other states) to enforce segregation but required seperate but equal accomodations be afforded. See below link:
What is the number of writs that can be prayed for and issued by the Supreme Court or a High Court of India?
The number of writs that can be prayed for and issued by the Supreme Court and/or a High Court of India is 3.
What issue was part of the cause of the civil war?
The Top Five Causes: 1.Economic and Social differences between the North and South. 2.States versus federal rights. 3.The fight between slave and non-slave state proponents 4.Growth of the Abolition Movement 5.The election of Abraham Lincoln
What US president issued an arrest warrant for the US Supreme Court Chief Justice?
Abraham Lincoln in response to Chief Justice Taney's habeas corpus decision. Lincoln ignored the court's order and continued to have thousands of arrests made without the privilege of the writ. Taney continued to badger Lincoln to follow the Constitution so Lincoln issued a Presidential arrest war…rant but couldn't decide who should make the arrest or where Taney should be imprisoned. Lincoln handed the warrant to his trusted friend U.S. Marshall for DC, Ward Hill Lamon, instructing him to use his own discretion. Lamon says he availed himself of that discretion and never served the warrant. See page 102 and 103 of "The Lawmen" which is a history of the U.S. Marshalls and their deputies from 1789 - 1989. That is one of several sources. Lincoln worshipers say the evidence is sparse that a warrant ever existed but U.S. marshal records, if those were the only evidence should be enough. .
Roger Brooke Taney was the fifth Chief Justice of the United States, holding that office from 1836 until his death in 1864 as he was nearing age 88. He was the first Roman Catholic to hold that office or sit on the Supreme Court of the United States.. (MORE)
Is issued when the supreme court agrees to review a case?
The paper that is issued to a lower court when the Supreme Courtagrees to review a case is called a Writ of Certioari. This paperis in essence, a demand by the Supreme Court to a lower court tosend documents regarding a case they are planning to review.
What did the US Supreme Court Dred Scott decision do to solve the issue of slavery?
The DingoBot has made an error. This answer is notrepetitive. The Dred Scott US Supreme Court decision in March of 1857 was adefeat for people against the institution of slavery. Here are somefacts about the decision: A. The Court determined that Dred Scott was not a citizen (Scottwas a slave seek…ing freedom ); B. The Court reasoned that Scott was not a citizen because he was aslave; C. The Court reasoned also that Scott was not a citizen because hewas Black; D. Thus Scott's case lacked standing in a court of law because hewas not a US citizen; and E. The results of the decision was a notable as it confirmed thatthe law protected slave property as it protected any otherproperty. (MORE)
What are the political factors that influence Supreme Court to decide civil liberties issues?
The US Supreme Court is an independent body of the checks andbalances of the US republic. It relies on the US Constitution andConstitutional case law to make any decisions on civil rights orany type of case it decides to review.
What is the constitutional issue of the supreme court case Wisconsin verses yoder?
The constitutional issue of the supreme court case Wisconsin verses yoder indicated that, children should not attend school full time, in order for them to get religion time.
Can a ordinary citizen bring up an issue to the supreme court justices?
Yes, but you cannot do it directly. The Supreme Court is a courtof appeals and as such does not hear ordinary legal cases. Yourcase must have passed through all lower courts of appeals beforethe Supreme Court will hear it. To have your case appealed at anyof these levels you will need a lawyer tha…t handles appeals cases,this will usually cost money. As with anything in our crazy country, you "get the justice you canafford to pay for". (MORE)
Gibbons v. Ogden was a Supreme Court Case in 1824 that was the first to address which of these issues?
whether the national government had the exclusive power to regulateinterstate commerce in the United States