Analyzing Justice Abe Fortas Justice Hugo Black

(Frederick, 2009). During the trial, Mr. Wilkins never called a witness to testify on Virginia’s behalf, and he countered allegations with only one day of defense. He neglected to challenge any of Heidle’s or Palmieri’s claims which reportedly provided key points of the state’s case. Heidle, who was a good friend of Jason’s, worked for him performing household tasks. Palmieri had worked in the dental office of Dr. Larzelere.

His formal opinion states that “Segregation of white and colored children in public schools has a detrimental effect upon the colored children. The impact is greater when it has the sanction of the law, for the policy of separating the races is usually interpreted as denoting the inferiority of the Negro group…Any language in contrary to this finding is rejected. We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of “separate but equal” has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal” (“Separate Is Not Equal”). With this ruling physical facilities could be considered equal but children could not be segregated based on color.

In her response lecture, Professor West identifies two very significant inconsistencies in Dr. Scott's lecture on the Judiciary. Professor West says, "You can tell a lot about a teacher by what they lecture. You can also tell a lot about a teacher by what they don't lecture or what they leave out"(West, 2:27). This idea is very apparent when it comes to Dr. Scott's lecture. Not only does Dr. Scott leave out some very vital information in his lectures, but he provides misinformation and makes contradictory points in his lecture.

For example, a man who was the lone dissenter, Justice John Marshall Harlan argued that constitution is colorblind because in the Civil Right citizens are equal each other even they are black or white. Not only that, Harland did not agree that legislature could not distinguish the race between people which involve civil right, he said that the justices did not deserved to hold the law when they were senseless. Despite Plessy and his lawyers provided all the argument about his case that him did not violation the law, they still could not change whatever the court decided about the Separate Car Act. The court showed that the Louisiana can process the law Separate Car Act.

The Gideon v. Wainwright case was a land mark case in the year 1963. This case was the topic of criminal defendants have a right to an attorney even if they cannot afford one. The case was about Clarence Earl Gideon was a man with an eighth-grade education who ran away from home when he was a young teen. He spent much of his early life as a drifter, spending time in and out of prisons for nonviolent crimes. Gideon was charged in Florida with breaking and entering with the intent to commit a misdemeanor, which is a felony under Florida law.

Justice Hugo Black was a United States senator for 10 years and served one of the longest terms in Supreme Court history with thirty four years and one month in the court. As a senator, he was a strong supporter of President’s Roosevelt’s New Deal reformation, therefore leading to his nomination to the Supreme Court in 1937. Justice Black’s rise to the Supreme Court was met with outrage and controversy from the public and the media due to his previous affiliation with the Ku Klux Klan and consequently tainted his reputation nearly costing him his seat in the Supreme Court. However, he was also an advocate for rights of racial equality and a defender of the constitutional rights of the accused. His literal interpretation of the Constitution

EqualJusticeUnderLaw The famous court case: Gideon v. Wainwright “If an obscure Florida convict named Clarence Earl Gideon had not sat down in his prison cell… to write a letter to the Supreme Court… the vast machinery of American law would have gone on functioning undisturbed. But Gideon did write that letter, the court did look into his case… and the whole course of American legal history has been changed.” Robert F. Kennedy (Gideon v. Wainwright). When this broke, trouble prone man was sentenced 5 years in prison for stolen change and drinks, he had no lawyer.

Anne Neal, the president and co-founder of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, brought up many great points in her speech on academic freedom. If we do not begin to allow the proper learning and teaching techniques, our society will begin to suffer. Academic freedom is in the decline in today’s society and Anne Neal wants to make a difference. Recently speakers have been backing out of their speeches because of student protests. Campuses are giving speakers speech codes with extremely broad rules.

constitution. During his time on the Supreme Court bench he has rejected the moves towards build-up, he believes that focus should be on the actual meaning of the Constitution and not just want the court says it means due to past cases. Most if not all of the Justices opinions are based off originality, and public meaning this approach seeking to explain the original constitutional text. (Conwell Law). “I have said in my opinions that when interpreting the Constitution, judges should seek the original understanding of the provision’s text, if that text’s meaning is not readily apparent”.

In the case Brewer vs. Hamilton Middle School the Supreme Court had to decide if the school had the right to limit Ben Brewer’s first amendment right to free speech. The school had decided to add a rule to the school dress code to ban students from wearing T-shirts that depict musical groups. Ben came into school after the rule had been enacted wearing a T-shirt that depicted Hall of Rejects which is a musical group. He was given the option to flip the shirt inside out and refused to. Mr. Brewer was then given a week of in-school suspension.

For the issue of first question it was ruled that Dred Scott could not sue, because he was not a citizen of Missouri, and therefore courts had no jurisdiction. Chief Taney stated that no “negro”, not even a freeman could be a citizen under the constitution. Third question that Taney claimed was the question of whether the Missouri Compromise was constitutional or not, in which Taney goes on to say that Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional. (Klingaman 28) This was the second time that the Supreme Court used its power of Judicial Review to find a federal congressional act unconstitutional.

He Lost twice in lower courts and then he took his case to the U.S. Supreme Court, which sided with the previous decision of racial segregation is constitutional. After losing his case the restrictions

The text appeals to the readers for both of the examples through emotion (pathos) by describing the conditions that the students learn in and it shows how the administration doesn’t care about the well-being of the students. Mireya discusses Fremont’s academic and sanitary problems and in the court papers it states, “Some of the classrooms ’do not have air-conditioning,’ so that students ‘become red-faced and unable to concentrate’ during ‘the extreme heat of summer.’ The rats observed by children in their elementary schools proliferate at Fremont High as well. ‘Rats in eleven . . . classrooms,’ maintenance records of the school report “(Kozol 708).

Freedom is a right. Freedom was given to us by the Founding Fathers. Freedom gives us no restrictions. The First Amendment gives us citizens the right to freedom of speech, allowing us to talk about our beliefs without restriction. Freedom gives us the right to help others through hard times and improve our communities.

Dr. King stated in his sermon, “The challenge we face today is to make it one in terms of brotherhood” (“Remaining Awake Through A Great Revolution). As a nation, we have failed to meet the challenges that Dr. King has set forth for us. There is still a considerable amount of hatred, prejudice, and bigotry in our nation today. Also, we have continued to mistreat and isolate different groups of people and races. Therefore, it is clear we still have work to do when it comes to the issue of racism and