| Papers [1-14] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 8] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 —> | Search results on "MINORITIES U S JUDICIAL SYSTEM": |
|
|
Minorities and the U.S. Judicial System, 2008.
This paper argues that the overpopulation of minorities in the U.S. judicial system is attributed to the unfair treatment and bias against minorities.
1,545 words (approx. 6.2 pages), 7 sources, APA, £ 34.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper investigates the reasons why about two thirds of the prison population consists of minorities. The author points out that all races of people are more likely to report crimes committed by minorities than crimes committed by whites, which leads to more minorities in the judicial system. The paper relates that more minorities live in poverty, which contributes to their inability to post bail or afford a good lawyer. The author states that, under sentencing guidelines, judges are expected to tailor sentences according to specific characteristics of individual offenders. The paper suggests that white people commit crimes because of social influence, which have a lesser sentence: whereas, blacks commit crimes because of attitude and personality, which have a harsher sentence. The paper recommends that the Sentencing Reform Act must be amended and society must find a better means of regulating arrests.
From the Paper
"To start, a crime would have had to been committed. From that point, one of two things may happen. An investigation begins or a witness reports what they have observed. If a suspect is detained they are questioned, or searched depending on probable cause. If enough evidence is gathered a suspect is then put under arrest and is booked, fingerprinted and waits for arraignment. After an arrangement, a suspect is given a bail and if met the suspect is released until their trial date. From this point, a suspect is tried in a criminal court to be judged by either a judge or a jury of his/her peers."
| |
|
Minorities and the U.S. Criminal Justice System, 2006.
A look at how the U.S. criminal justice system mistreats minorities.
2,727 words (approx. 10.9 pages), 7 sources, MLA, £ 56.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper attempts to demonstrate that minorities, especially African-Americans, are unfairly treated by the U.S. criminal justice system. The paper cites statistics showing that, while all minorities are afforded less than fair treatment by the criminal justice system, African-Americans seem to be particularly vulnerable to sentences involving capital punishment. The paper further asserts that African-Americans suffer from political, social, psychological and economic exploitation at the hands of powerful whites in this country and, as a result, black people generally are purposefully put into situations where the commission of criminal acts are seen as the most effective solution to their problems. The paper concludes that the problem will only end once white people honestly recognize the racism that exists within the U.S. on all levels of society and end it.
Table of Contents
Race, Ethnicity and the Criminal Justice System
Drug Policies and Racial Disparities
From the Paper
"In 1996, six in 10 jail inmates were racial or ethnic minorities -- 41 percent were African American, 18 percent were Hispanic and 3 percent Asian or Alaska Native, according to the Department of Justice. The Sentencing Project, a Washington-based think tank, reported in 1995 that 32.2 percent of all African Americans men between the age of 20 and 29 are under criminal justice supervision on any given day -- in prison or jail, on probation or parole. Even more unsettling, nationally blacks are incarcerated at a rate of 7.66 times greater than whites. This paper shall demonstrate how minorities, especially African-Americans, are unfairly treated by the US criminal justice system."
| |
|
Human Rights and the Judicial System, 2002.
An examination of the violation of human rights and the failure of the U.S. judicial system.
1,320 words (approx. 5.3 pages), 5 sources, MLA, £ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper outlines some current cases of human rights and the U.S. judicial system?s failure to address violations. It looks at how the U.S. Supreme Court refuses to hear the cases of the prisoners held by the U.S. military at Guantanamo, while the Washington appeals court has also shunned them, leaving the prisoners with no international intervention to save them from their plight.
From the Paper
"Ever since the Second World War, there has been greater focus on the way that people are treated during war. Not just during war, but even in times of peace under different regimes Democratic countries expect people to be treated fairly. Democratic countries believe that all nationalities, no matter what their consequences may be, are entitles to their rights. Even when people are accused of international terrorist acts they are still entitled to their rights as prisoners. Prisoners of war too have their rights, and providing them with these rights is considered a democratic practice, without which a country cannot really be a democratic one."
| |
|
Texas And Federal Judicial Systems, 2003.
A comparison of the Texas judicial system with the federal judicial system.
813 words (approx. 3.3 pages), 3 sources, MLA, £ 19.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper briefly looks at the differences between the way these two systems work. It looks at the technical differences as well as the philosophical differences between these legal systems.
From the Paper
"The U.S. Supreme Court runs by Constitutional mandate, and therefore, handles cases that deal with potential violations of constitutional law (Supreme Court of the United States, 2003). The U.S. Supreme Court also develops rules of procedure (with congressional authorization) that need to be followed by the lower courts of the United States.
These higher courts also differ in how justices serve. On the U.S. Supreme Court, justices are appointed for life by the President of the United States, and can?t be removed unless they retire or are impeached for wrong-doing. In Texas, however, justices must run for election to Supreme Court and the Court of Criminal Appeals, which means that the justices are spending time campaigning as well as handling legal matters."
| |
|
American Judicial System, 2005.
An examination of whether the American judicial system favors the criminal or not.
1,449 words (approx. 5.8 pages), 13 sources, APA, £ 33.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Lawmakers are striving on a daily basis to establish strict laws for the punishment of juvenile offenders, despite beliefs that the American judicial system shows favoritism to the criminal. This paper examines how the American judicial system does not favor the criminal and states that the system is continuing its efforts to allow the imprisonment of offenders of all ages, as well as impose harsh punishments on those who commit drug and violent crimes.
From the Paper
"According to Butterfield (1996), as crime in America appears to be on the decline, reports from law enforcement officials indicate violent crimes are expected to rise. In the opinion of many American citizens, the American judicial system treats criminals as victims indicating favoritism towards the criminal. According to Reidinger (1996), the American judicial system has taken an attitude that "perpetrators not only deserve blame but are worthy of it, in the fullest, most human sense of the word" (p. 98). In actuality, the American judicial system imposes strict penalties in the majority of criminal defense cases in this country, despite the Americans' belief that it favors the criminal. Youthful Offenders Due to an increase in crime in the United States, the general public holds a mistaken notion of leniency toward our youthful offenders. As an example, underage students on college campuses continue consuming alcohol at alarming rates; yet the majority of colleges fine students rather than pressing charges and allowing them to face legal punishment. In a recent article entitled Murder at an Early Age, Adler (1998) advises that psychologists maintain the theory that a young child who commits a cold-blooded rape and murder cannot tell the difference between fantasy and reality leaving the impression to the general public that the child has gotten away with murder. In his article, Adler (1998) reports that according to the Justice Department, all states may now charge juveniles as adults. This gives judges and prosecutors the power to file major youth felony cases in adult courts."
| |
|
Judicial Systems in America and Singapore, 2002.
Examines and compares the judicial systems in these two countries.
711 words (approx. 2.8 pages), 3 sources, MLA, £ 17.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at the differences in the legal and judicial systems of Singapore and the United States. The paper looks at the powers of the Supreme Court in both countries, their common roots in the English legal system, the court system and the classification of misdemeanors.
From the Paper
"The judicial power in Singapore is vested in the Supreme Court, which consists of a chief justice and an unspecified number of other judges, all appointed by the president acting on the advice of the Prime Minister. The Supreme Court conducts judicial review of the constitutionality of laws. The Constitution establishes two levels of courts-- the Supreme Court and the subordinate courts, meaning the magistrates' courts which try civil and criminal offenses with maximum penalties of three years' imprisonment or a fine of $10,000; the district courts, trying cases with maximum penalties of ten years' imprisonment or a fine of $50,000; the juvenile courts, for offenders below the age of sixteen; the coroners' courts; and the small claims courts, which hear civil and commercial claims for sums of less than $2,000."
| |
|
American Political and Judicial System, 2002.
A look at the American political and judicial system.
1,400 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 2 sources, £ 36.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This six-page undergraduate paper describes in detail the American Political and Judicial system. From the beginning, the system was set up to establish widespread democratic participation to elect leaders to institutions that are limited and have checks on what they can do.
| |
|
Offices in the Judicial System, 2004.
Examines and compares the roles of three different offices in the American judicial system.
6,000 words (approx. 24.0 pages), 8 sources, MLA, £ 98.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper comparatively discusses the origin, development, and behavior of three different offices in the United States's judicial system, those of prosecutor, private attorney, and public defender. It also examines how each of these roles interrelate with one another. The paper concludes that these three offices hold their independence, and their separation of powers is guaranteed; without the functioning of these offices, the judiciary would come to a standstill.
From the Paper
"There is no relation between private attorney and prosecutor and there is no confidential or privileged communication under the law, between them. A prosecutor may be disqualified if he obtained any privileged information by any attorney-client relationship that would adversely affect the interest of the defendant in any of the pending criminal charges against him. However a lawyer who is a parent, child sibling or spouse of a prosecutor can defend a criminal case prosecuted by the other lawyer?s office as long as the other lawyer does not in any manner handle the case."
| |
|
American Judicial System, 2002.
Discusses decline of public trust & confidence in the legal system.
2,250 words (approx. 9.0 pages), 9 sources, £ 54.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Discusses decline of public trust & confidence in the legal system. Asseses basic issues. Public perception of legal system. Basis of U.S. rule of law. Principle of judicial independence. Challenges t the justice system. Importantce of a strong & independent judiciary. Ideals of American judicial independence related to rest of the world.
From the Paper
" While a decline of public trust and confidence in the legal system may appear to be of recent origin, it has a long history. In an address to the American Bar Association delivered in August 1906, Roscoe Pound, then Dean of the Law Department of the University of Nebraska, observed:
Dissatisfaction with the administration of justice is as old as law. As long as there have been laws and lawyers, conscientious and well.meaning men have believed that laws were mere arbitrary technicalities, and that the attempt to regulate the relations of mankind in accordance with them resulted largely in injustice. But we must not be deceived by this..."
| |
|
U.S. and British Judiciary Branch, 2005.
A comparison and contrast of the structure of the U.S. and British governmental judiciary branch.
2,597 words (approx. 10.4 pages), 4 sources, MLA, £ 54.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The structure of the judiciary branch of the government in the United States and the United Kingdom are quite different. The paper points out that textbooks in relation to the American government and politics pay substantial attention to the role of the judiciary; while many textbooks on the government and politics of the United Kingdom have virtually ignored the role of judges in Britain. The purpose of this work is to research and examine the lack of information and attention to the role and function of the judicial branch of the British government and to compare and contrast the judicial branches of the U.S. and the United Kingdom.
Statement of Thesis
Introduction
I. The Legislative and Judicial Branch in the U.S. versus the U.K.
A. The United States
B. Great Britain
Summary and Conclusion
From the Paper
"It is common knowledge that the Constitution of the United States is preserved very studiously in a vault that is lowered into an airtight and secure chamber each evening. The United States Constitution in its written form is a treasured patriotic document symbolically as well as in substance as it states the premises on which America was declared to be independent and free of the sovereignty of the Crown as well as stating other inalienable rights that are held to be sacred by Americans who are patriotic and love the United States. There is a pronounced difference in the form of the U.S. and British Constitution in that the British constitution is not preserved in written form as is the constitution of the United States. Instead it is formed by statute in part, by law in part, by convention in part, and can be altered by general agreement for the creation, variation or abolishing of a convention and finally may be changed. Finally the constitution may go through changes or alterations due to an Act of Parliament. Although the sections of the government in the United Kingdom can often be observed overlapping one another each part of the government has a specific role to fulfill."
| |
|
Affirmative Action and the Judicial System, 2005.
Discusses equal educational opportunity for blacks and the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the United States government.
1,804 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 5 sources, MLA, £ 40.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Affirmative Action policies were first put into place by the United States government in the 1960s in order to guarantee equal access to jobs, housing, education and other fundamental rights to all American citizens under the law. This paper explores ways in which affirmative action policies, designed to promote equal higher education opportunity for African-Americans in the United States, have been dealt with by the U.S. government, now and in the past. It looks at how this is approached by the executive, judicial and legislative branches of the United States government, respectively.
From the Paper
"Even today, in courts, in classrooms, in the media, and in other walks of life, Americans remain deeply divided over the use of affirmative action policies in admitting minority and other students protected by affirmative action policies (or not) to colleges and universities. Two recent U.S. Supreme Court cases Gratz v. Bollinger, et al. and Grutter v. Bollinger, et al., both brought by white student applicants who had been denied admission to the University of Michigan, raised the whole question anew."
| |
|
The U.S. Patriot Act of 2001, 2008.
Examines the U.S. Patriot Act of 2001 and issues of privacy versus security.
2,645 words (approx. 10.6 pages), 7 sources, APA, £ 54.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that the U.S. Patriot Act of 2001, which was enacted on October 26, 2001, came to be regarded as an important source in the US' fight against terrorism. Rushed in to law in the wake of 9/11, the paper relates that the Patriot Act widens significantly the extent of government powers regarding confinement of non-citizens for an indefinite period and searches, arrests and scrutiny based on lower levels of reason and stages of judicial review. The paper points out that this wide ranging Act is being debated because it is perceived to interfere with constitutional privacy safeguards and yet this country must have the powers to protect itself against future terrorists attacks.
From the Paper
"There were several instances in which Muslims and those of foreign Asian origin were facing troubles in the name of security. Groups of federal agents on March 20-21, 2002, with the US Customer Services as their head combed Muslim houses, businesses, educational institutions, and establishments in Northern Virginia in a chain of raids entitled Operation Green Quest. The searches scared and enraged the Mohammedans as agents smashed doors, chained people, and made seizures of private property arraying from PCs to children's toys."
| |
|
The U.S. Constitution, 2004.
This paper discusses the four competing plans - the Virginia Plan, the Pinckney Plan, the New Jersey Plan, and the Hamilton Plan ? which led the framers of the U.S. Constitution to strike a balance called the "Great Compromise".
910 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 7 sources, APA, £ 22.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, instead of simply amending the Articles of Confederation, the Virginia Plan proposed an entirely new system by calling for a powerful national government consisting of three branches: executive, legislative, and judicial with a two-house legislature. The author relates that the Pinckey Plan was based on many of the same principles of the Virginia Plan, but wanted the election of the members of the House of Representatives by the state. The paper stresses that New York delegate Alexander Hamilton, displeased with the Virginia and New Jersey Plans, advocated virtually doing away with state sovereignty.
From the Paper
"Roger Sherman from Connecticut proposed the Great Compromise to settle the differences between supporters of the Virginia Plan and the New Jersey Plan (The Constitutional Convention). Sherman?s plan called for a Congress with two houses, the Senate and the House of Representatives. The Senate would give equal representation to all of the states with each state having two senators that would be chosen by the state legislature. However, The House of Representatives would base representation on a state?s population and members would be elected by all of the voters in the state."
| |
|
Judicial Activism vs. Judicial Restraint, 2002.
The paper examines the way that the judiciary is empowered with the freedom to act in opposition to the wishes of the electorate using judicial activism, unlike the political branches who must follow the wishes of the voters.
1,161 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 4 sources, MLA, £ 27.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses how judicial activism is necessary because some issues are too difficult for the political branches of the government to confront. It examines how advocates of the opposing theory of "judicial restraint" hold that the judiciary should follow precedent carefully and defer to legislative decisions. It also analyzes the reasons the system of governmental checks and balances and judicial review was set up.
From the Paper
"Another important principle implicit in the Framers' writings and actions was that no branch of the government is infallible and this must be seen to apply to the majority of voters, whose will is expressed through their elected representatives, as much as it applies to the un-kingly presidency and the nonpartisan judiciary. Thus the will of the majority in various states was that schools be segregated by race and the rules of these localities codified this expressed wish of the majority which resulted in a status quo in which white and black children were educated separately and, according to advocates of the system, equally. Strict adherence to the will of the majority and to the right of states to decide their own course of action would have meant that the Supreme Court could only decide in Brown v. Board of Education (1954) that the majority's wishes must be respected. The decision to order desegregation, however, was based on no explicit Constitutional basis but on the finding that "government-supported racial discrimination violates the principle of equal justice under the law" (Patterson 425). Although this was widely perceived as a case in which the Constitutional principle could not be denied it should also be understood as a textbook case of the need for judicial review and the invalidating of laws that are unconstitutional."
|
|
|
