This 7 page paper examines various landmark cases and provides a general overview of the Supreme Court. How the Court plays a role in the system of checks and balances is paramount as is its role in deciding power issues between states' rights and the federal government. Bibliography lists 2 sources.
Name of Research Paper File: RT13_SA235sup.rtf
Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
fact, all capital cases might, as the Supreme Court continues to wrestle with the Constitutionality of the death penalty. Throughout history, capital punishment has always been debated as something that
appears cruel and unusual. Yet, Friendly & Elliott (1984) explain that the "Supreme Court still wrestles with the definition of what is cruel and unusual and with the question
of how much of that definition should be left to the states" (p.175). Indeed, the Supreme Court handles such issues and the death penalty is only one example of
the magnitude of its authority. It does above all evaluate the merits of a case as it concerns the rule of law, and the Constitutionality of the law. In fact,
even if a law is on the books, it may be challenged as being unconstitutional. How can this be? Basically, when laws are made, they are made through the legislative
process and while most laws seem to comply with the ideation of the people, and there is the idea that the law complies with the Constitution, that is not always
the case. In other words, laws may be made that are not in accordance with protections that are given by the constitution. That is why certain issues become controversial like
capital punishment, abortion, freedom of speech and the right to bear arms. This last example is controversial because many gun enthusiasts claim that that the Second Amendment gives them the
right to bear arms. Yet, that clause has been interpreted differently by different experts. Some authorities note that it was written in that verbiage due to the context of the
day, but with todays police forces and regulations, it would be ludicrous to allow citizens to carry weapons. The other side interprets the Constitution literally and argues that if only