The-United-States-Constitution-ensures-that-individuals-are-guaranteed-certain-rights-law-homework-help

Read each paragraph and give me your opinion do you agree do you disagree with those 4 paragraphs one for each part and if you agree or disagree why or why not

1. The United States Constitution ensures that individuals are guaranteed certain rights and are treated fairly by the government. It was also written to make sure that the government did not have too much power over citizens so the Bill of Rights was written to give certain rights to give a balance of power to both citizens and the government. In addition to the United States Constitution each state has their own constitution. State constitutions are often more detailed and are longer than the federal constitution and they usually focus more on the details and limitations than that of power. State constitutions also address issues unique to that particular state and each state constitution must consistent with the federal constitution. State constitutions generally give more provisions and rights to individuals than the federal constitution. The general rule is that if a state constitutions gives an individual less rights than is guaranteed in the United States Constitution then it is considered unconstitutional and then the federal constitution overrides the state’s constitution. When it comes to the law and who has the power the federal law deals with federal criminal cases and the state rules over state criminal cases. This only changes when the state violates the defendant’s rights then the case is ruled in the federal courts under the United States Constitution which is the supreme law of the land. There are also other circumstances in which the federal law trumps state laws due to the fact that the crime falls under both federal and state criminal law such as kidnapping which would fall under the state jurisdiction but if the perpetrator crosses the state line then it falls under federal jurisdiction.
Duncan v Louisiana, (1968) no. 410
ParalegalEDU.org, 2013, State Constitutions vs. The United States Constitution
Rolando V. del Carmen, 2014, Criminal Procedure : Law and Practice, 9th edition

2. Top of Form 1
Summarize the various tests for determining which rights are incorporated and applied to the states.
In criminal law there are many different tests, circumstances, and other mitigating factors that must be applied, processed, and figured into every trial, case and hearing. Each state has its own laws and bi-laws regarding everything from crime and punishment to civil matters, but the federal sector of government is over the state sector, and sometimes they move in as the authoritative figure. The first test in my own personal and professional opinion is the state constitutions, these written laws are what the state law makers and legislators have agreed upon, these are the legal parameters and guiding principles that each person residing, visiting, or traveling through that particular state must abide by. This is a very significant test because it will eventually prove and be the determining factor in and how a case or a trial plays out, but one important thing to remember is the federal level is always higher and holds more power. The second test in my opinion is statutory law, in this federal parameter, it says what an officer of the law can and can not do, it strictly lays down the foundation and clearly states what is legal and what is illegal, and I feel as though citizens should be more knowledgeable about these laws because they were created to protect and defend each American citizen.
Explain whether all content in the Bill of Rights is fundamental and should be automatically incorporated.
The Bill Of Rights is a founding and a solid American document that was created for one reason and one reason only, the preservation and protection of the American people. This body of rules and laws and boundaries were set in place so that each and every American citizen regardless of race, color, or financial status would have legal protection instantaneously. I do most certainly think that the Bill Of Rights is fundamental because it is a document that is self explanatory, unbiased, and fair and one that shows equality for all people. This document doesn’t have to be re-written or replaced because everything needed is in it all ready. These laws are constitutional and no one, meaning any human being, foreign or domestic, police, president, or any other elected official can choose to abide by or carry out these laws because they have already been composed and agreed upon and they are the foundation of the American people and lifestyle.
Discuss why the Bill of Rights would be drafted as it is, if those rights were not fundamental.
As I stated earlier in the discussion, the Bill of Rights was a ” meal ready to eat” and by that I mean all was included within the pages of this historical document. I feel that the Bill was drafted as is because it outlined everything from freedoms, to privacy, to rights to certain types of trials and juries, protected free men and prisoners and citizens properties, so I feel as though why the document was drafted in this straight froward manner is because the document is self contained and self sustaining and self sufficient.

3. Compare the similarities and difference between Witherspoon V. Illinois and Lockhart V. McCree cases: There are several similarities between the two cases such as the main one with issues on the jurors. Each one of these cases had jurors opposed to the death penalty but were asked what they thought about it after rendering their decision of guilty. Another similarity is both respondents’ had their constitutional rights violated when it comes to the 6th amendment. Also, each respondent was being charged with the same criminal charge of felony murder. However, the differences between each case are that the Lockhart’s jury could be removed if they were biased towards the death penalty, whereas, Witherspoon’s jury could not be removed.
Juries should not be asked how they feel towards the death penalty after the guilty verdict has come in, instead they should be asked these questions before the trial even begins. Thus way the respondent has a right to an impartial trial, instead of one being based upon biased feelings.
Explain the effects of the rulings of Witherspoon and Lockhart rulings: The effects of their rulings provide to other people that everyone has the right to their rights no matter the case. Also, the rulings so that being biased towards a situation does not make it right to ignore someone’s constitutional rights because they committed a heinous crime. It also shows that even though innocent people are convicted daily of crimes they did not commit they stand a chance to prove their innocents by getting the right to an impartial jury trial.

4. Compare the similarities and differences between Witherspoon v. Illinois and Lockhart v. McCree cases.
These two cases similar in crime and offense, but also much different in various areas, its cases like these that must be examined in depth to find out the who, the whys, and other important details to determine why these decisions were made, reversed, and upheld.
Similarities:
In the case of Witherspoon V. Illinois the differentiating factors were that there was in my issue internal moral issues going on within the entire trial, the situation became so tumultuous that neither party was backing down and the battle only grew more intense and fierce that the Supreme Court had to step in. What makes the case different and what separates it from the above mentioned case is the juror who was selected as a jury peer had major issues pertaining capital punishment, and in some strange way, everything just went left per say.
In the second case Lockhart V. McCree, I felt as the what made this case different is because the Supreme Court actually bought in the Bill Of Rights as liberating and super relevant piece of evidence which in my opinion could not be refuted or shot down and that was the 6th Amendment. I feel as though with the introduction of these statues and self explanatory laws, the verdict spoke for itself out of the mouth of the Constitutional laws.
Explain the effects of the rulings of Witherspoon and Lockhart rulings.
I feel as though the ruling of these two particular cases reassured and showed all Americans that regardless of the setting, court, or venue, that democracy and justice still prevailed. I feel as though this bought a new found sense of confidence back to the people and to the honest and lawful members of the court system that one still could be legal and hold their opinion and truth at the same time. I feel as though this erased some of the doubt or unbelief one may have had in the process and terms of the US court system and it showed that there still was room to hope in our courts once again.
Bottom of Form 1

Bottom of Form 1

Bottom of Form 1

Bottom of Form 1

"Is this question part of your assignment? We can help"

ORDER NOW