Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on The Constitution: How Should The Supreme Court Base Its Decisions?. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
5 pages in length. The Constitution of the United States is not up for interpretation; the framers of this guide for civilized society were quite articulate in expressing their collective thoughts to such a degree that no modern-day court – no matter how high on the legal ladder – need misconstrue its meaning in order to further its own agenda. Indeed, the only reason for the Supreme Court to question the framers' intent is to forcibly bend an otherwise straightforward amendment to suit its own needs. Bibliography lists 4 sources.
Page Count:
5 pages (~225 words per page)
File: LM1_TLCConstSup.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
a degree that no modern-day court - no matter how high on the legal ladder - need misconstrue its meaning in order to further its own agenda. Indeed, the
only reason for the Supreme Court to question the framers intent is to forcibly bend an otherwise straightforward amendment to suit its own needs.
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, while holistic approach is certainly admirable from an equitable standpoint, it
does not equate to following the Constitution as it was plainly written, not merely intended. Case in point is 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 of religion guarantee "does not require the requested exception, and that petitioner (Olsen) was not denied equal protection-establishment clause rights by the
governments refusal" (United States Court of Appeals, 1989). This particular case, along with similar others like United States v. Rush, 738 F.2d 497
and State v. Olsen, really infuriated the religious community to the point of people hurling accusations of bigotry and unconstitutional representation. According to some, Ginsburg joins an elitist club
...