Vickie Lee Roach: Legal Case Study

She was to serve a total of 6 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 3 years. Roach overcame her rocky past and became somewhat of a model prisoner, earning a Master's Degree in professional writing. Whilst

He challenged the law that took away his right to vote while in prison, he argued that s.51(e) of The Canadian Elections Act violated his Charter Rights by excluding every person who is imprisoned in a correctional facility for the commission of any offence. Sauvé claimed that it contradicted s.3 of The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly. Sauvé was a citizen and as a citizen under the Charter, he was guaranteed the right to vote.

Don’t Sleep Through the Amendment Annoyed about the loss of the civil war and hoping to declare continued superiority over the blacks of the South, the Southern states created the poll tax. All who wanted to vote in 1904 Virginia had to pay a tax of a dollar and fifty cents a price about thirty dollars in today’s money. Because of its high price poor whites and most African Americans were not able to vote because they were generally poor. Many saw the injustice of the poll tax and tried to push for its demise. “The poll taxes themselves were at one point ruled not to be unconstitutional in the Breedlove v. Suttles case because it did not violate the provisions set forth by either the Fourteenth Amendment or the Fifteenth Amendment”

It wouldn’t be until 1950, nearly 100 years since the first African-Americans were impaneled that women would be given the right to serve on a jury. Although the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920 granted women the right to vote; women had to persevere vigorous opposition in order to gain the right to serve in a jury. The majority of the opposition were the same who opposed the women’s suffrage movement claiming that having women serve on a jury was “almost unthinkable” as they felt women were too delicate and to subject them to jury service would pull them away from their household duties. It wasn’t until 1951 that the first two women were impaneled on a jury in Massachusetts, by then there were only 9 states left that wouldn’t allow women to serve on a jury.

This Amendment eliminated the favoritism on who can vote (males only) and allowed all citizens, regardless of their gender to vote and have a voice on their nation 's leader.

In 2013, the Supreme Court reviewed the case, based on the question if Congress violated their Fourteenth and Fifteenth amendment rights when they reauthorized section 4(b) of the Voter’s Rights Act in

The very Constitution declares that when a government no longer has the safety and rights of their people in mind, then the people should take it upon themselves to abolish it, but women did not have a vote to exercise this right. Similarly, in their article, “Teaching the New Departure: The United States vs. Susan B. Anthony” Kathi Kern and Linda Levstik state,“For Anthony and hundreds of other women in the early years of Reconstruction, “taking” their freedom meant exacting their rights at the point where citizenship was “produced”: the polling booth” (Kern and Levstik 123). Voting was and is an essential part of citizenship in the United States,

The Supreme Court Of Canada had said the if there were five people acting together could petition they way the laws were governed. So the five women had gotten together and signed the petition for the government to look into if women can be addressed as senators. This case was also known as the “person 's case”. The case was looked at March 14th, 1928 and after it was closed the law was not changed it stood the same which was women were not “qualified persons”.

(1076). Therefore, the appellant failed to appeal his case meaning the crown had won. The court justified is decision in the case by stating that, section 35 applies to rights in existence when the Constitution Act,1982 came into effect; it does not revive extinguished rights. An existing aboriginal right cannot be read to incorporate the specific way it was regulated before 1982. (1076).

In 1874, Susan B. Anthony wrote a petition to Untied States Congress requesting: “that the fine imposed upon your petitioner be remitted, as an expression of the sense of this high tribunal that her conviction was unjust." (Anthony) Anthony believed the fine $100 USD was unjust because she and her friends were just trying to fight for an amendment that would guarantee women’s voting rights. NWSA kept on with their steps to achieve their goal. In 1878, the Women Suffrage Amendment, later became the Ninth Amendment, had first introduced in the Congress of United States. “Susan B. Anthony: The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.”

Regardless of her appointment, she was met with heated resistance by her male peers. Her first case was challenged by the defence lawyer claiming she was not a person under the British North America Act of 1867 3. This was due to ambiguous and gendered language in Section 24 of the British North America Act of 1867. The BNA act of 1867, also known as the Constitution Act, were a collection of policies in the Constitution of Canada. Section 24 stated that only “qualified persons” could be appointed to the Canadian Senate5.

How was the right(s) infringed? Vickie Lee Roach was a prisoner whose ability to vote had been taken away by Commonwealth legislation. She argued that the legislation breached her constitutional rights and argued her case in the High Court. Roach’s disqualification from voting violated both the Australian Constitution’s requirement that parliament be “directly chosen by the people”

In World War 1 a lot changed for the United States. One things that changed was their foreign policy. We know it changed because they went from a period of isolationism to being involved in world affairs. We are going to look at how the war changed American society, why they entered the war, and the foreign policy change. During World War 1 a lot changed about American society.

In her speech she continues to say, “And it is a downright mockery to talk to women of their enjoyment of the blessings of liberty while they are denied the use of the only means of securing them provided by this democratic-republic government -- the ballot.” (Anthony,1)

American citizens should not be required to vote, because mandatory voting contradicts the purpose of democracy itself. When you think of democracy, the word freedom will often come to mind. This freedom is linked to a democratic society, and it includes the right to vote, but it also includes the right not to vote or voice opinion. If people were required by law to cast their vote, a great deal of problems would arise that could potentially compromise the foundations of the voting system itself, along with the freedoms that many citizens often take for granted. Although this policy is successful in other countries, compulsory voting in the United States would only be problematic because of the American people 's belief in the freedom to