Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Power Of The Supreme Court. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
3 pages in length. The decisions of recent Supreme Court cases revolve around a society that has become somewhat extremist. No longer do benevolence and humane ethics rule the land, but rather legal infiltration must work in tandem with a society lost to individualism. Issues such as gun control, presidential privilege, indiscriminant background checks via the Brady Bill and medicinal marijuana use have represented an entirely new and different approach to law interpretation and judgment. Bibliography lists 5 sources.
Page Count:
3 pages (~225 words per page)
File: LM1_TLCPwrSC.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
tandem with a society lost to individualism. Issues such as gun control, presidential privilege, indiscriminant background checks via the Brady Bill and medicinal marijuana use have represented an entirely
new and different approach to law interpretation and judgment. Possessing complete control in any political or legal arena most always leads to public partitioning, with a larger majority hostile and
critical of the unconstitutional process than those who support it. This country was founded upon the very tenets of democracy (Paine, 1987; Shanker, 1997), however, can America truly be
democratic when the highest court in the land is not subject to anywhere near the type of scrutiny imposed upon other bodies, such as Congress or the Executive Branch?
Clearly, the extent to which the Supreme Court is not only able to interpret but manipulate the law is both grand and far-reaching. For example, Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg --
as well as the other Supreme Court Justices -- prides herself on her ability to judge a situation holistically rather than by segment, which serves to address the entire issue
as one and prevent any one specific aspect from being overlooked. However, all the people do not adopt this perspective, inasmuch as Ginsburg has a certain way of drawing
out the agitated masses when she has ruled in a particularly unpopular direction. Case in point was Carl Eric Olsen v. Drug Enforcement Administration in June of 1989.
Olsens request was to be allowed to employ marijuana as a religious sacrament; indeed, the priest of the Ethiopian Zion Coptic Church saw nothing wrong with its utilization as long
as it was under the direction of the church. Yet the Supreme Court judge did not take the same stance as Olsen, commenting that the First Amendments free exercise
...