CONSTITUTIONAL COURT‚ GAUTENG (REPULIC OF SOUTH AFRICA) CASE NUMBER: 10/2012 In the Appeal between: HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT‚ FREE STATE APPELLANT And JOLENE PAKKIES Acting on behalf of Dineo Tau Zozo Tau Lulu Tau RESPONDENT ___________________________________________________________________________ HEADS OF ARGUMENT OF APPELLANT ___________________________________________________________________________ In an Appeal to the Constitutional Court the Appellant‚ the
Premium Childhood Constitution United States Constitution
In order for a country to be truly democratic‚ all people must have these rights because the population consists of everyone‚ not just one race. One of the key moments in the oppression of the African American community was the Plessy v. Ferguson Supreme Court
Premium Jim Crow laws Plessy v. Ferguson Racial segregation
United States citizens because of the Supreme Court case‚ Miranda v. Arizona. Miranda was arrested for rape and kidnapping of a woman. Following his arrest‚ he was convicted based on his confession of the crime. Nevertheless‚ the Supreme Court ruled that his rights were violated according to the Fifth Amendment‚ which lead to his release. Reynolds Lancaster and Gina Jones were two authors that pointed importance of rights and issues related to the case Miranda v. Arizona‚ which lead to the Miranda warning
Premium Crime Police Law
My Supreme Court case is Miranda V. Arizona. This case represents the consolidation of four cases‚ in each of the cases which the defendant all confessed guilt after being questing without being told their Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights during an interrogation. This case was happening on March 13‚ 1963‚ Ernesto Miranda was arrested in his house and brought to the police station where he was questioned by police officers in connection with a kidnapping and rape case. After two hours of interrogation
Premium Miranda v. Arizona Supreme Court of the United States Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Korematsu V. United States was a court case during the time of World War II. After the bombing of Pearl Harbor‚ people of Japanese descent were considered threats. As a result‚ Franklin Roosevelt issued the Executive Order 9066 on February 19‚ 1942. This Order demanded that each and every person of Japanese descent be moved to internment camps‚ regardless of citizenship. Fred Korematsu‚ a Japanese American citizen‚ refused to leave his home to go to the internment camp. Therefore‚ he was convicted
Premium United States World War II President of the United States
The Minnesota Nurse Practice Act Statute 148.261 Grounds for Disciplinary Action‚ part 11 states “Engaging in any unethical conduct‚ including‚ but not limited to‚ conduct likely to deceive‚ defraud‚ or harm the public‚ or demonstrating a willful or careless disregard for the health‚ welfare‚ or safety of a patient. Actual injury need not be established under this clause.” This state statute applies to the given scenario as the nurse by complying with the doctor’s orders is participating in an
Premium Nursing Ethics Law
should excel scholastically‚ in leadership‚ service‚ and character. This is all true. But I believe that the total student should also have integrity‚ respect‚ and a drive to make the world and the people around them better. I should be accepted into Minnesota Honor Society because I demonstrate the needed qualifications‚ and more. Scholarship‚ leadership‚ service‚ and character are what make up a well-rounded‚ successful person. I have a good GPA‚ but‚ more importantly‚ I enjoy learning. Gaining new knowledge
Premium Management Leadership Education
Before making the final decision the court considered the following factors‚ length of delay‚ prejudiced to the accused‚ explanation for the delay‚ and Waiver of Appellants. The Supreme Court then concluded that the delay of 2 years after the appellant’s preliminary trial was unreasonable. The Crown did not justify the institutional delay and did not prove that the
Premium
Movement‚ the Supreme Court embodied the idea of legal liberalism‚ using the law to achieve political ends. During this era‚ the Court used the civil rights cases brought to them to achieve social change and promote equality. The decision in Loving v. Virginia is one example illustrating the Supreme Court using its power to attain racial equality and change and reform the American society‚ as striking down anti-miscegenation laws wiped out the last remaining Jim Crow laws. Loving v. Virginia proves to
Premium United States Supreme Court of the United States Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Virginia is a United States Supreme Court case which laws prohibited interracial marriage. The case was brought to Mildred and Richard Loving‚ a white man and a black woman‚ who were sentenced to a year in prison for being married. The marriage violated the anti-miscegenation law‚ which prohibited
Premium Marriage Miscegenation Race