Georgia v. Randolph is a landmark case pertaining to the search of a private resident without a search warrant where one resident gives law enforcement personnel consents to conduct a search and the other member objects. This particular case involved a married couple Scott and Janet Randolph‚ who were having marriage problems. Janet decided to leave Scott taking their son with her to Canada (Wood 2007 para 1). After being gone for a little over a month she and the child returned to the same residents
Premium Family Supreme Court of the United States Mother
Carhart case in 2007 was significant to the way abortions were to be performed. The case established the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act which banned D&E procedures and regulated abortions. The procedure was the dilatation of a woman’s cervix followed by the extraction of an unborn baby. (Kennedy 1)
Premium Human rights Pregnancy Abortion
regard. This will help all the faculties to be found by a much wider audience. V Guru Magazine It gives us immense pleasure to bring to you the first issue of the V Guru magazine. VESIT has many magazines like Vishwakarma and E-magazine for students‚ individual magazines published by different societies like IEEE‚ CSI etc. A need for an exclusive VESIT faculty magazine was strongly desired. Thus‚ we decided to start V Guru‚ which
Premium Management Organization Website
Plyler v. Doe was one of many legal cases we talked about over the course of this semester in our SEI class. This case was the most interesting to me and so I thought I would share my knoedlge on this court case. This court case was brought to the suprieme court where the defendant was Plyler and the plaintiff was Doe. The Doe family was of Mexican orgin and were from Texas. The definedants argued that undoumented children were not “persons” and this was very alarming to me! The state was denying
Premium United States Education Immigration to the United States
Case: Brandenburg V. Ohio Year: 1969 Facts: Clarence Brandenburg‚ a leader of an Ohio affiliate of the Ku Klux Klan‚ asked a reported to attend a KKK rally and cover the event. The reporter attended with a camera crew and filmed the rally that took place. Twelve white hooded figures‚ including that of Brandenburg’s‚ were seen with a wooden cross that was burned‚ and Brandenburg the said‚ “We’re not an revengent organization‚ but if our President‚ our Congress‚ and our Supreme Court‚ continues to
Premium United States Ku Klux Klan Southern United States
King v. Burwell and Judicial Decision-Making Process The Supreme Court decision in King v. Burwell surrounded the challenge of provision to the Affordable Care Act. The key question the case focused on was whether Obamacare authorized federal tax subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance through a state exchange. The challenger‚ King‚ argued the way the law was written can’t allow for states to subsidized insurance through a federal-run exchange. They argued that insurance subsides
Premium United States Constitution United States Law
Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California was a case in 1976 which the Supreme Court of California decided that mental health professionals have a duty to protect individuals who are being threatened with bodily harm by any of their patients. Originally‚ in 1974‚ the decision was mandated warning the threatened person or persons but‚ in the year 1976 the California Supreme Court decided that it was intended for a “duty to protect” a victim. Mr. Poddar was a graduate student in the University
Premium United States Supreme Court of the United States Law
Gill v. Whitford is a Supreme court case that deals with political gerrymandering. A lower court ruled that the state’s Republican-drawn map constitutes an "unconstitutional partisan gerrymander." The case involves district lines in Wisconsin that challengers say‚ “were drawn unconstitutionally to benefit Republicans.” The case could have a major impact on how district lines are drawn up nationwide.The court has said that too much partisanship in map drawing is illegal‚ but it has never said how
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States United States Constitution
I chose to discuss a Supreme Court Case which was found to be in direct violation of the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. The case I am discussing is Loving v. Virginia. Initially‚ the Anti-miscegenation laws were put into place during the slavery/colonial period. No white man would tarnish his reputation or family name by actually marrying a slave but would indulge in the forbidden fruit by raping and/or having adulterous relationships with the slave. If through
Premium American Civil War African American Slavery
Mendez v. Westminster (1946) was a case enacted by‚ “Gonzalo Mendez‚ William Guzman‚ Frank Palomino‚ Thomas Estrada‚ and Lorenzo Ramirez” who “filed suit on behalf of their fifteen…children and five thousand other minor children of ‘Mexican and Latin descent’” (Valencia‚ 2010‚ p.23). They sued Westminster school district because they were denying their children the right to enter schools near their home. The school was in California and was predominantly White and did not allow any Mexican American
Premium Racism Race African American