Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on The Fourteenth Amendment and Expectations of Property. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This is a 6 page paper that provides an overview of the fourteenth amendment. Issues of expectation of property are covered by analyzing Perry v. Sindermann. Bibliography lists 8 sources.
Page Count:
6 pages (~225 words per page)
File: KW60_KFlaw055.doc
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
continued employment? What did Justice Douglas say about the First Amendment in connection to this case? Do you agree with what Justice Marshall stated about government employee rights? Explain why
or why not. The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States holds forth protection for the right of due process for all Americans. In a generalized sense,
this means that punitive measures taken against an individual must only be carried out as a matter of due process, after an established court has reviewed the facts and /
or the individual accused has a chance to defend his or her self (Kaplan & Lee, 2012). The specific text reads that no state shall "deprive any person of life,
liberty or property without due process of law" ("Substantive", 2012). In the case of Perry v. Sindermann and the Board of Regents v. Roth, the issue of due process came
about because of each complainants claims that his dismissal from a non-tenured university position constituted a punitive action (the deprivation of property) without accompany due process, because neither man had
been given an opportunity to appeal his dismissal. Central to the complaint was the notion that the dismissal was itself wrongful, and was purely a reaction to unpopular statements made
by the complainants against the faculties of their respective universities; in this case, the dismissals would constitute a violation of freedom of speech, and the claim of a Fourteenth Amendment
violation would be even stronger. Justice Douglas asserted that the case of Perry v. Sindermann represented a "substantive First Amendment claim" because it is likely the dismissal was predicated by
the aforementioned unpopular statements (FindLaw, 2010a). Marshall asserted of government employee rights that such employees must be given an opportunity to respond in cases of such dismissals, to mitigate the
...