Week 10 Assignment - Individual Rights and Social Order

docx

School

Strayer University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

420

Subject

Law

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by KidElectronCaterpillar24

Week 10 Assignment - Individual Rights and Social Order Week 10 Assignment - Individual Rights and Social Order LaShonda Ellis LEG420: U.S. Courts Instructor Name: Dr. Crystal A. Kuykendall September 6, 2023 1

Week 10 Assignment - Individual Rights and Social Order Informal and Formal Social Controls "Social control" was initially introduced to sociology in 1894 by Albion Woodbury Small and George Edgar Vincent. However, their contributions drew upon earlier philosophical ideas from thinkers such as Thomas Hobbes and Cesare Beccaria and the insights of sociologist Émile Durkheim, who explored this concept in his work "The Division of Labor in Society." Social control comes in two distinct forms: formal and informal. Formal social controls encompass legal mechanisms designed to govern human behavior, whereas informal social controls are non-legal means that shape and guide conduct. Government entities, such as the police, courts, and regulatory bodies, can enforce formal social constraints. Informal social controls encompass various means of regulating human behavior and interaction that are not codified in laws. Society primarily shapes and guides the conduct of its members through the process of socialization. Informal controls can manifest as positive reinforcements like praise or compliments, fostering a sense of social desirability and reinforcing a desired behavior. Conversely, they can manifest as negative sanctions such as ridicule or gossip, discouraging unwanted behavior. These informal social controls are predominantly enforced within families, schools, and workplaces. Formal social control is established by imposing legal penalties and sanctions by recognized authorities. Conversely, informal social control is upheld by the members of a community or society rather than through lawful means. Unlike formal social control, it relies on ordinary individuals and not necessarily legal or judicial authorities to maintain order and conformity. Formal social control is typically characterized as control rooted in legal frameworks. Some scholars classify actions as formal controls when prescribed by 2

Week 10 Assignment - Individual Rights and Social Order written and official documents, such as the rules and regulations of specific organizations. Any control mechanism enforced or mandated by the government falls under formal social controls. Examples include surveillance, police investigations or arrests, judicial court-imposed punishments, and policies established by regulatory bodies like the Food and Drug Administration. The Pros and Cons of Judicial Activism Judicial Activism is exercising the power of judicial review to set aside government acts. Generally, the phrase is used to identify undesirable exercises of that power, but there is little agreement on which instances are unwanted (Roosevelt, 1). Judicial Activism has a significant role in the Checks and Balances System. In the realm of government, the concept of checks and balances is a fundamental principle designed to prevent any branch from wielding too much power. Politics' pervasive influence on various government branches naturally extends its impact on the judicial system. However, unlike the conventional liberal-conservative divide seen in other departments, the judicial system employs terms such as "progressive interpretation" and "literalist" to describe differing approaches. Judicial politics takes shape based on how judges perceive the law and their preferred methods of interpretation. Judicial Activism offers valuable insights. Many sensitive issues require delicate handling, which may only sometimes align with existing regulations. Therefore, judicial activism grants judges the latitude to apply their judgment when the law falls short. Through judicial Activism, judges can use their convictions to challenge and nullify laws they perceive as unjust. It empowers judges to address injustices personally. Whether it involves an executive order, 3

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Week 10 Assignment - Individual Rights and Social Order immigration policy, or a criminal trial, judges can offer a unique perspective when determining the outcome of a particular case. Many local judges are elected to their roles, allowing citizens to vote them out of office if their rulings consistently clash with public opinion. It provides a mechanism for people to remove judges from their positions. However, it's important to note that some judges may serve lengthy terms up to 15 years after a single election, which may impose limitations on this benefit. In judicial Activism, two key elements intersect: a political interpretation of the law and a straightforward application of it. While these facets frequently align, they can also diverge significantly. In the United States, a judge can override a law based on their discretion, and in certain circumstances, they can even set aside a jury's verdict. When this form of the judicial system is in operation, it may appear as though the laws lose their applicability, as judges can supersede any existing law, essentially rendering them inconsequential in their eyes. It does not apply to any law. Judicial Activism takes on greater significance when it comes to the members of the Supreme Court, as their decisions typically carry significant weight. Eventually, its decisions would become definitive, possessing the ultimate authority on matters; their judicial interpretations set precedents for future rulings in various cases. For instance, when specific provisions of the Defense of Marriage Act were invalidated, it led to a wave of other judges also permitting same-sex marriage. Whether one views these actions as positive or negative, they are a product of judicial Activism. The advantages and disadvantages mentioned earlier demonstrate that when judicial Activism is appropriately employed, it can effectively check and balance existing laws. Nonetheless, it can also be susceptible to misuse, influenced solely by a 4

Week 10 Assignment - Individual Rights and Social Order judge's inclinations. We can place our trust in Judicial Activism based on the information presented. Substantive and Procedural Law Substantive law encompasses the legal framework that outlines rights and responsibilities across various domains surrounding criminal, civil, and administrative law. Its significance in preserving social order lies in its capacity to delineate the boundaries of acceptable behavior by establishing clear definitions of right and wrong. In contrast, procedural law includes the rules that dictate the functioning of the legal system, governing matters such as evidence, procedures, and courtroom conduct. This encompasses rules of evidence, procedural guidelines, and court regulations. Procedural law holds paramount importance in maintaining social order, as it guarantees the equitable and impartial functioning of the legal system. Both substantive and procedural law play pivotal roles in upholding societal harmony. Substantive law serves as the foundation for distinguishing ethical from unethical behavior, while procedural law guarantees the equitable and unbiased operation of the legal system. Criminal Law, Civil Law, and Administrative Law Criminal law encompasses the body of legal principles that define criminal offences and prescribe the corresponding penalties. Criminal law enforcement falls under the jurisdiction of government authorities, with the burden of proof resting on the prosecution to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (Regoli, 2). In contrast, civil law pertains to the legal framework governing disputes between individuals or groups. Courts oversee civil law enforcement, and 5

Week 10 Assignment - Individual Rights and Social Order the burden of proof in civil cases is typically based on the preponderance of the evidence, wherein the party with the more persuasive evidence prevails. On the other hand, administrative law governs government agencies' operations and actions. These agencies enforce administrative law, and the burden of proof in administrative cases often adheres to the substantial evidence standard. Numerous resources are available when researching criminal, civil, and administrative issues. You can access court records, case law, and other legal materials through online databases, libraries, or law firms. Upon identifying a subject of interest, delving into the court record can provide insight into the case's factual details and the legal arguments presented. Examining relevant case law can offer valuable guidance by showcasing how previous courts have ruled in analogous situations. An example of a civil case is Brown v. Board of Education (1954), a pivotal and historic ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court, marking the end of the "Separate but Equal" doctrine and the prohibition of racial segregation in schools. This landmark decision deemed unconstitutional any laws that required or enforced racial segregation in public schools, irrespective of claims that the segregated facilities were equal in quality. The Supreme Court's unanimous verdict asserted that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal," violating the Equal Protection Clause within the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Nevertheless, the Brown v. Board of Education decision did not prescribe specific methods or approaches for eliminating racial segregation in schools. Subsequently, the Court's ruling in Brown II (1955) urged states to undertake desegregation "with all deliberate speed," laying the groundwork for the practical implementation of desegregation measures. 6

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Week 10 Assignment - Individual Rights and Social Order An example of a criminal case is Gideon v. Wainwright: Clarence Earl Gideon faced charges of felony breaking in a Florida state court. When he appeared in Court without legal representation, Gideon requested that the Court provide him with an attorney. However, Florida state law stipulated that an attorney could only be appointed for an indigent defendant in capital cases, and therefore, the trial court declined to select one for Gideon. Consequently, Gideon had to represent himself during the trial, which resulted in his conviction and a five-year prison sentence. Subsequently, Gideon initiated a habeas corpus petition in the Florida Supreme Court, contending that the trial court's decision infringed upon his constitutional right to legal counsel. Regrettably, the Florida Supreme Court denied Gideon's habeas corpus relief. A famous administrative case is United States v. Printz, 521 U.S. 898 (1997), which determined that Congress overstepped its authority under the Tenth Amendment by mandating state and local officials to conduct background checks on firearm purchasers. The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, also known as the Brady Bill, initially required that "local chief law enforcement officers" (CLEOs) conduct background checks on individuals seeking to purchase handguns until the Attorney General could establish a federal system (Silver, 3). County sheriffs Jay Printz and Richard Mack separately contested the constitutionality of this interim provision of the Brady Bill, representing CLEOs in Montana and Arizona, respectively. In both cases, the District Courts found the background checks unconstitutional. However, they also determined that this requirement could be severed from the rest of the Brady Bill, allowing for the continuation of a voluntary background check system. Following an appeal from the Ninth Circuit's ruling, which declared the interim background check provisions 7

Week 10 Assignment - Individual Rights and Social Order constitutional, the Supreme Court granted certiorari. It consolidated these two cases, ultimately deciding them with Mack v. United States. 8

Week 10 Assignment - Individual Rights and Social Order Sources: 1. Kermit Roosevelt. No Date. judicial activism. https://www.britannica.com/topic/judicial-activism 2. Natalie Regoli. July 2, 2018. 11 Principal Pros and Cons of Judicial Activism. https://connectusfund.org/11-principal-pros-and-cons-of-judicial-activism 3. Stephen Silver. September 22, 2021. Background Checks for Gun Owners Have Hit 400 million Since 1998. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/politics/background- checks-gun-owners-have-hit-400-million-1998-194247 4. United States Court. No Date. Facts and Case Summary - Gideon v. Wainwright. https://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/facts-and- case-summary-gideon-v-wainwright 5. Oyez. No Date. Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (2). https://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1955/349us294 9

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Week 10 Assignment - Individual Rights and Social Order

Related Documents