society and the law

Supreme court opinions
Concurring opinion-majority opinion
Dissenting opinion-minority
-can write more than one of each

Pro-posture vs con-posture (concurring vs dissenting) Society and the Law focused on a right and how it affects the greater good of the population

The book: 2.1 pg 46,

Don’t know names of cases…study concept

Law and individual
Constitution protects individual but does not provide ultimate protection (state trumps individual)
Are violent video games protected under first amendment?
Concurring: yes they are protected, can’t create whole new category of speech that bans it specifically for children
Speech is protected unless it incites a riot or violence
Speech & action is less protected

Law in California: fines if not labelled as violent/18+ or if sold to anyone under 18
“you know it when you say it”—same as pornography just adding ‘for minor’
Porn is protected, obscenity is not
-aka porn is not illegal, video games is not illegal but if either is found obscene then it is illegal
-but if porn is obscene it is illegal for everyone, but if the video game is obscene it would be just for child

2.4 pg 98
Sharing of music files online
Violate copyright law?
Concurring: yes
Dissenting: no
To be copyright lawyer have to be engineer or science

3.3 pg 157
Strip search of middle school to find drugs protected under 4th amendment search and seizure
Need reasonable belief (higher than mere suspicion)
Probable cause: more likely than not that there is the object at location or person committed crime
Mere suspicion is lowest
Girl had day planner with knife, pills, cigarette, pill, and lighter…..pill was prescription Advil and OTC pain reliever that she said was given to her by friend …no proof that girl was selling these OTC pills….made girl take off clothes in nurse office shook bra and underwear to see if pills fell out….parents were never called…settled for $250k….officials were held liable not people involved in search because of government employee immunity
4th amend must obtain search warrant….need prob cause to pursued judge
Don’t need when reasonable suspicion (stop and frisk)…look it up in book
Concurring:
Dissenting:
Warrant not needed if after arrest, plain view, from terry stop/stop and frisk, if it is less invasive then full search
During pat down need to say this feels like it could be a weapon in order to retrieve it
Government employees are protected from lawsuits but police officers are not, they can be sued individually
Reasonable suspicion: a moderate chance
Reasonable doubt:
________
Incident of pills had happened a few days ago, first search found nothing
The fact that the pills posed no harm, quantity and strength
All indicate search was unreasonable
Major-it was unreasonable
Dissent-it was reasonable b/c pills could be there

20 MP
2 10pt essay
2 5pt essay

50 points total

Drugs, marijuana legalization, meth movie and TMs, heroine and phetnol deaths in pitt and east coast, digital nation and technology, school shootings, violent video games 1st amendment, sharing of music files, strip search 4th amendment, Mexican drug cartel arrest kingpin,

Digital nation-Philly military experience playing COD in military recruit

Know majority and minority opinions and what the ruling is

DC vs Heller
Right to bear arms

Challenge DC gun laws
Majority-violates 2nd amend right to own hand gun in house for self-defense and non-military service
-depends on the community (varies) right of individual vs right of community
Right was not to keep any single weapon for any given purpose—can prohibit concealed w/o license,
Supreme court is aware of serious issue with guns
Amike briefs-friends of the court (NRA, groups against guns)—very heavily weighed
Have right to have handgun in home for self protection
Gun violence is serious problem—not role of court to say 2nd amendment is extinct (basically saying that only military and police should have weapon)
90% in favor of more extensive background check
Congress: mental health bill, background check, gun trafficking—all had more than 50% of the vote, but none passed because didn’t get the 60% necessary to pass

Does 4th amend prohibit DNA sample by police after arrest?
Majority: Using a check swab for DNA is a reasonable search to confirm ID of person post arrest is fine
Dissenting: 4th amend prohibits the DNA swab

Dog sniffing for drugs outside home without permission
Majority: It should be prohibited
Dissenting: belief that odors would drift out of the house so it is not a violation

Comparing cases—the judges are very strict to their opinions
Scalea: 4th amend searches (DNA, dogs)—conservative