Search results
In theory, the Supreme Court could function with only two justices — the chief justice and an associate justice. Today, the number of justices stands at nine, where it has remained since 1837 except for a brief period during the Civil War and Reconstruction, when it was as low as eight and as high as ten.
This book analyzes 30 Supreme Court cases chosen by a group of Supreme Court justices and leading civics educators as the most important for American citizens to understand. An additional 100 significant cases included in state history and civics standards are summarized.
People also ask
What does Bryan Stevenson say about America's justice system?
Why did the court return to the 'clear and present danger' doctrine?
Why did Justice Holmes dissent?
Constitutional protection of this fundamental civil liberty, however, has not been absolute. Congress has enacted laws limiting freedom of speech under certain conditions, and the federal courts, in certain cases, have endorsed these restrictive acts.
Board of Education (1954),” Horwitz contends, “the [Warren] Court regularly handed down opinions that have transformed American constitutional doctrine and, in turn, profoundly affected American society” (3).
Feb 4, 2013 · A study of the Supreme Court under the leadership of Chief Justice Earl Warren, from 1953 to 1969, discussing the impact of the liberal court's civil rights and civil liberties decisions on American constitutional law
In an engaging and personal talk -- with cameo appearances from his grandmother and Rosa Parks -- human rights lawyer Bryan Stevenson shares some hard truths about America's justice system, starting with a massive imbalance along racial lines: a third of the country's black male population has been incarcerated at some point in their lives.
Abstract. This book consists of a series of lectures that I gave during my time as a judge. Its title, The Pursuit of Justice, was chosen because I believe judges should strive to achieve justice. They should not be content to be merely neutral arbitrators who, having listened to the arguments of both sides, give reasoned judgments.
