The Background of DC v Heller:

DC v. Heller was a landmark legal case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution does indeed protect an individual’s right to possess a firearm for private matters and use within the home in federal enclaves.

The decision rendered by the United States Supreme Court in DC v. Heller ruled did not effectively address the question of whether or not the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution extends beyond federal enclaves to each individual state. That being said, DC v. Heller, was the first case in the United States Supreme Court to decide whether the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.

On June 26th of 2008, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed the lower court’s (The court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit) decision in Parker v. District of Columbia. The lower court had previously struck down provisions instituted by the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 as unconstitutional by determining that handguns are firearms used for the purposes latent in the Second Amendment and that the District of Columbia’s regulations act was thus an unconstitutional banning. In addition, the courts struck down the portion of the regulations act which required all firearms (including rifles and shotguns) to be kept unloaded or bound by a trigger lock. Prior to this ruling, the Firearms Control Regulation Act of 1975 also placed a ban on residents from owning handguns, save for those registered prior to the passing of the act.

The Case Profile of DC v Heller:

The following is a case profile of the legal trial eponymously titled ‘DC v Heller’:

Date of the Trial: DC v. Heller was argued on March 18, 2008

Legal Classification: Administrative Law; this legal field associated with events and circumstances in which the Federal Government of the United States engages its citizens, including the administration of government programs, the creation of agencies, and the establishment of a legal, regulatory federal standard

United States Reports Case Number: 554 U.S. 570

Date of the Delivery of the Verdict: DC v. Heller was decided on June 26, 2008

Legal Venue of DC v Heller: The United States Supreme Court

Judicial Officer Responsible for Ruling: Chief Justice

Verdict Delivered: The United States Supreme Court in DC v. Heller found that certain provisions of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 directly infringed on an individual’s right to bear firearms as protected in the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

What is Anthrax?

Anthrax is an acute and deadly disease caused by Bacillus anthracis; in general, the majority of these forms of these diseases are lethal and the virus ultimately affects both humans and other animals.

Anthrax became prominent in the early 2000’s when several human cases of anthrax were directly liked to deliberate and violent exposure. This string of events raised concerns about the use of anthrax as a biological weapon and as a means to perpetuate terrorist attacks. Anthrax, when broken down, makes an extremely effective biological weapon, since the spores of Anthrax can remain dormant for a number of years and activate as soon as conditions become optimal. As a result of these characteristics, it is very easy to contract the deadly disease through inhalation, which ultimately leads to the potential for mass dispersal through explosives, aircraft transportation or random package drops.

The Anthrax Disease:

The Anthrax disease has long been known, for writings and archaeological evidence suggest that the disease has been known since the Ancient World. The disease caused by Anthrax primarily affects farm animals; human beings cannot pass the Anthrax disease onto each, making the Anthrax disease non-contagious. That being said, it takes slight exposure to just a few spores to lead to a serious infection. Similar to other bacterial infections, Anthrax may be treated with antibiotics.

Kinds of Anthrax:

There are three specific kinds of Anthrax: gastrointestinal, inhalation and cutaneous. Gastrointestinal Anthrax is caused through ingestion of infectious material, such as raw or uncooked meats. The patient, when infected with gastrointestinal Anthrax may experience severe diarrhea, a loss of appetite, nausea and a severe fever. Cutaneous anthrax is primarily contracted through open wounds or cuts on the skin. This form of Anthrax is characterized by small sores which eventually turn into large blisters with a black center.

The most serious and complex form of Anthrax is inhalation Anthrax; this form of Anthrax is caused by inhaling infectious spores which may be stirred up in soil, deliberately introduced into the environment or scraped from animal material.

Anthrax as a Weapon of Terror:

Anthrax was initially tested as a biological weapon by the Japanese army in the early 1930s; the majority of this testing involved exposing the deadly agent to prisoners of war—this testing precipitated thousands of deaths.

Anthrax was first stockpiled by the United States in the early 1970s when the nation signed the Biological Weapons Convention.

In theory, the spores of Anthrax can be cultivated without the obtainment of specialized equipment; all an individual needs to cultivate the deadly agent is a microbiological education. That being said, to produce large amounts of aerosol from Anthrax suitable for biological warfare requires extensive knowledge, training and advanced equipment.

Concentrated anthrax spores were first used as a weapon for bioterrorism in the 2001 anthrax attacks; the spores were delivered by mail and sent to several media outlets as well as two Democratic senators. As a result of these attacks, 22 individuals were infected and five eventually died.

In response to these attacks, the United States postal service sterilized most forms of mail by using a process of gamma irradiation and treatment through a proprietary enzyme formula.

What is Case Law?

Case law refers to the body of available writings that explain and elucidate upon the verdicts of particular cases. Case law is typically created and developed by judges who deliver these particular rulings; case law is driven when judges write their decisions and give the reasoning behind their verdicts. Included in these verdicts or decisions are precedents that are based off other cases and statutes that had an impact or bearing on their particular decisions.

A single case may generate a dearth or virtually no written opinions or interpretations; however, other cases, such as those that are heard before the Supreme Court, may yield a number of opinions or interpretations as the case’s subject matter will invariable make their way through various lower-circuit courts. This assortment of collected opinions may be referred to in a future case by other judges when they themselves offer their rulings on similar cases; this relationship that is derived through case law, enables the law to remain relatively consistent.

What Court Systems use Case Law?

The majority of state trial courts—for example the California Circuit Court—will not publish opinions. As a result of this function, many state courts do not contribute or add to the body of case law. Furthermore, Federal trial courts—such as the United States District Court—will also not publish opinions that would otherwise be added to case law. The majority of published opinions found in case law, which are made available online and in print form, typically come from both the federal higher courts and the local state courts.

Official government agencies will publish both the court decisions found in the state’s higher courts and those matters heard in the Federal Supreme Court, whereas the opinions of the aforementioned courts, those legal systems that do not publish opinions to the public, will have their decisions published by various private agencies throughout the United States.

Case Law and Common Law:

In the majority of regions throughout the world, Case law is commonly referred to as ‘common law’. This terminology derives from the fact that, while forms of legislation are typically passed by a distinct government branch, the court system is able to exercise authority through the use of precedent and case law. As a result of this authority, case law is viewed as a crucial function of the judiciary body of government, for the study enables the court system to transform decisions to arrive into a sort of de facto law, which may be subsequently used to facilitate decisions made in future cases.

Judge’s Powers of Case Law:

In some instances, a judge may intentionally refute established case law as a means to re-examine a precedent to ultimately change it. This situation typically arises when precedents in case law are viewed, by the judge, as outdated or irrelevant in the contemporary society. When a judge issues a decision that he or she knows will be appealed, the judge will effectively push the case into higher courts where the established precedents may be overturned in favor of a re-evaluation or a new outlook.

The Background of Olmstead v. United States:

Olmstead v. United States was a landmark decision offered by the Supreme Court of the United States. Olmstead v. United States reviewed whether the use of wiretapped telephone conversations, obtained by federal agents, without any judicial approval, can be subsequently used as evidence in a federal criminal trial. The use of such information in Olmstead v. United States was evaluated in conjunction with a defendant’s rights latent in the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. The courts in Olmstead v. United States held that neither the rights and liberties granted in the Fourth nor Fifth Amendments were violated. This decision; however, was later overturned in Katz v. United States.

The case of Olmstead v. United States concerned a group of petitioners, including Roy Olmstead, who directly challenged convictions by arguing that the use of evidence obtained from wiretapped private telephone conversations was a direct violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

The petitioners in Olmstead v. United States were convicted for conspiracy for violations of the National Prohibition Act—the men convicted were charged with unlawful possession, transporting and selling alcohol. The evidence obtained through wiretapping revealed that Olmstead and nearly 75 other individuals were engaging in a bootlegging business; Olmstead was the general manager of this business and received 50% of the profits. No laws were violated in regards to the installation of the wiretapping equipment—the officers did not trespass upon the homes or the offices of the defendants.

The Case Profile of Olmstead v. United States

The following is a case profile of the legal trial eponymously titled ‘Olmstead v. United States’:

Date of the Trial: Olmstead v. United States was argued on February 20-21 of 1928

Legal Classification: Administrative Law; this legal field associated with events and circumstances in which the Federal Government of the United States engages its citizens, including the administration of government programs, the creation of agencies, and the establishment of a legal, regulatory federal standard

Accused Criminal Activity: The following criminal activity and charges were cited by the United States Government against Roy Olmstead within the appeal brought forth subsequent to the initial ruling:

Olmstead and a group of 72 employees were charged with illegally possessing, transporting and selling alcohol. Olmstead to refute the conviction claimed that the United States Government obtained evidence through the illegal use of wiretapping devices. Olmstead claimed that the Fourth and Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution protected private conversations form being tapped into.

United States Reports Case Number: 277 U.S. 438

Date of the Delivery of the Verdict: Olmstead v. United States was decided on June 4, 1928

Legal Venue of Olmstead v. United States: The United States Supreme Court

Judicial Officer Responsible for Ruling: Chief Justice William Taft

Verdict Delivered: The United States Supreme Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment’s proscription on unreasonable search and seizure did not apply to the use of wiretaps.

What is a Case Search?

A case search refers to ability to pull-up previously rendered court decisions and evaluates the intricacies as well as the verdicts of the particular case. A case law search may be initiated by an individual or legal professional; the majority of cases and their subsequent ruling are kept on public record to act as precedents for future case hearings. A case law search is a fundamental tool of the judiciary system, where legal professionals and individuals alike can observe the specifics latent in any case to ultimately apply them to their particular legal matter.

A case law search will benefit individuals or legal professionals who undertake or are required to undertake a legal battle. The ability to observe previously-rendered court decisions and the intricacies which surrounded the particular legal matter will aid in constructing an argument (whether for the defense or the prosecution) to better understand the subject matter of the case. Furthermore, a case law search will increase your probability of winning or receiving a favorable settlement; the ability to review a past case will invariably deliver a precedent or ruling which can be applied to a current legal matter.

How to Initiate a Case Search:  

The first step to conducting a case law search requires you to read all available information and intricacies concerning your case. The obtainment of this information will help determine what path you need to follow to engage in your case search. A case law search is typically conducted at your local law library; the majority of verdicts or judgments of a legal matter in a local court system is kept in the archives of legal libraries within the jurisdiction or locality where that particular hearing was held.

The majority of counties throughout the United States have law libraries. Additionally, all law schools throughout the United States are required to have a law library on or near campus, which will store an assortment of precedents and previous cases. As a result of these locations, a case law search must be initiated in a forum or location that houses the tangible books, which compile previous cases.

When you arrive at your particular law school or law library, you must search for a series of numbers and letters that take this form: 86 N.Y 3d 130, 651 N.Y.S. 3d 914 (1991). This example of a citation can be used as a formal address to find the particular case—these numbers tell you two different books, which will provide pertinent information given your inquiry. In this example, if you look on page 130 of volume 86 of the New York Reports, 3rd series, you will find the case you are looking for. The second address in this citation refers to volume 651 of the New York Supplement’s, third series page 914. The year 1991, refers to the date that the case was decided.

You must keep in mind that each state will label its books by different classifications or names, so asking a librarian what the lettering system is will help facilitate your search. In addition to finding cases in your particular library, you can also conduct a case law search online; a case search may be initiated online through law school sites or various law sites.
 

Who is Warren Jeffs?

Warren Jeffs is the acting president of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Warren Jeff served as president of this religious organization from 2002 to 2007 and from 2011 to present day.

Warren Jeff, by many followers, is considered the Prophet of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ Latter Day Saints; as President and prophet of the religious institution, Warren Jeffs wields an enormous amount of religious as well as secular power. This power is primarily in alignment with the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints’ theocratic principles.

Warren Jeffs Arrested:

Warren Jeffs gained international infamy in May of 2006 when the religious leader was placed on the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s most wanted list. Warren Jeffs became a target of the FBI for unlawful flight to avoid prosecution in the state of Utah for charges relating to his alleged arrangement of illegal marriages between his adult male followers and numerous underage girls.

Warren Jeffs was arrested in late August of 2006 in Nevada and agreed to undertake a trial in Utah for his role in setting up these illegal marriage. In May and July of 2007, Arizona charged Warren Jeffs with eight additional counts—including partaking in illegal sexual activities with minors and incest—in two separate cases.

William Jeffs’ Court Cases and Legal Troubles:

Warren Jeffs’ trial began in early September of 2007 in St. George Utah. The trial lasted less than a month and on September 25th, Warren Jeffs was found guilty of two counts rape for his role as an accomplice. On November 20, 2007 Warren Jeffs was sentenced to prison for 10 years to life; Warren Jeffs began serving this sentence at the Utah State Prison. This conviction; however, was reversed by the Utah’s Supreme Court on July 27, 2010 because the jury operated under faulty instructions. Since this technicality ultimately freed Warren Jeffs of his previous charges, he was later extradited to Texas. That being said, Warren Jeffs is not free from legal quarrels, for he still faces pending charges of sexual assault and bigamy in connection with a raid on a West Texas ranch that took place in 2008.

The Background of Washington v. Glucksberg

Washington v. Glucksberg was a legal matter in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the right to assistance in committing suicide is not protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Dr. Harold Glucksberg, along with four other doctors, a non-profit organization and three terminally ill patients challenged Washington State’s ruling against assisted suicide through the passing of the natural Death Act of 1979. The group of physicians, terminally ill patients and the Compassion in Dying organization claimed that the act of assisting one’s suicide was a liberty interest protected by the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution through the Due Process Clause.

Washington v. Glucksberg Decision:

The Supreme Court Case of Washington v. Glucksberg reversed a previous ruling administered by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, who claimed that a ban on physician assisted suicide embodied in the state’s Natural Death Act of 1979 was a violation of the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. The court claimed that because an assisted suicide is not a fundamental liberty, it is not protected under the 14th Amendment.

The case was eventually heard in the United States Supreme Court, where Chief Justice William Rehnquist stated that the ban was rational because it furthered various compelling state interests, primarily the preservation of human life and protecting the mentally ill or disabled from medical malpractice and coercion. The ban, according to Washington v. Glucksberg, stated that if the court system declared physician-assisted suicide a constitutional right, the nation would start down the path to voluntary and perhaps involuntary assisted suicide.

The Case Profile of Washington v. Glucksberg:

The following is a case profile of the legal trial eponymously titled ‘Washington v. Glucksberg’:

Date of the Trial: January 8, 1997

Legal Classification: Constitutional Law

Date of the Delivery of the Verdict: June 26, 1997

Legal Venue of Washington v. Glucksberg: United States Supreme Court by way of the United Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Judicial Officer Responsible for Ruling: Chief Justice William Rhenquist

Verdict Delivered: The United States Supreme Court held that the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment did not protect the right to commit assisted suicide

The Background of Weeks v. United States:

Weeks v. United States was a landmark Supreme Court decision where the courts ruled unanimously that the warrantless seizure of items from a private residence constitutes a direct violation of the United States’ Forth Amendment. Additionally, Weeks v. United States, set forth the exclusionary rule, which prohibits the admission of illegally obtained evidence in the federal court system.

Weeks v. United States Trial:

At its foundation, Weeks v. United States raised the question of what the Fourth Amendment requires; the Supreme Court in Weeks v. United States had to answer whether the Fourth Amendment provides specific protections to private citizens of the United States and whether illegally obtained evidence can be used in a court of law.

Freemont Weeks was suspected of using the United States mail system to distribute chances in a lottery. This act was considered illegal gambling in the state of Missouri. Law enforcement officers of Missouri entered Weeks’ home, searched his room and seized possession of papers and other property belonging to him. Following this procedure, state agents returned to Weeks’ home to collect more evidence; in neither instance, did the law enforcement officers obtain a search warrant to seize Weeks’ possessions.

In Weeks v. United States, the plaintiff argued that because the Fourth Amendment states that people are safe from unlawful searches and seizures, thereby ruling any evidence obtained in violation of such a guarantee cannot be used in the court of law. Solicitor General Davis and Assistant Attorney General Denison presented the case on behalf of the United States and argued that the prosecution of Weeks proceeded in a logical sequence and that the police officers involved in the arrest and subsequent searches acted on an increasing body of evidence which incriminated Weeks in a violation of federal law. The Court; however, upheld the statements by Weeks and ruled in favor of him in Weeks v. United States.

The Case Profile of weeks v. United States

The following is a case profile of the legal trial eponymously titled ‘weeks v. United States’:

Date of the Trial: Weeks v. United States was argued on December 2nd and 3rd of 1913

Legal Classification: Administrative Law; this legal field associated with events and circumstances in which the Federal Government of the United States engages its citizens, including the administration of government programs, the creation of agencies, and the establishment of a legal, regulatory federal standard

United States Reports Case Number: 232 U.S. 383

Date of the Delivery of the Verdict: Weeks v. United States was decided on February 24, 1914

Legal Venue of weeks v. United States: United States Supreme Court

Judicial Officer Responsible for Ruling: Chief Justice Edward D. White

Verdict Delivered: The warrantless seizure of documents or possessions from a private residence violated the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures. All evidence obtained in this manner is excluded from delivery in a federal criminal prosecution.

Supreme Court Defined:

The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest judiciary system in the nation. As a result of this classification, the Supreme Court possesses ultimate, although largely discretionary, appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal court systems, as well as original jurisdictions or local courts, in the United States.

The Supreme Court of the United States meets in Washington, D.C. in the United States Supreme Court Building. The Supreme Court consists of a chief justice and eight acting associate justices who are nominated by the President of the United States of America and subsequently confirmed by the U.S. Senate. When a chief justice is appointed, he or she maintains life tenure unless they are removed after impeachment.

What is a Landmark Supreme Court Decision?

A Landmark Supreme Court Decision refers to any Supreme Court verdict that fundamentally changes the way society operates. The rulings or judgments made by the Supreme Court of the United States are not subjected for further review by additional court systems. As a result of this characteristic and the fact that the subject matter of a particular Supreme Court case is typically fundamental and important, a number of Supreme Court verdicts will establish a precedent and forever alter a particular sect or behavioral pattern in society.

Examples of Landmark Supreme Court Cases:

Marbury v Madison (1803): This landmark Supreme Court decision is regarded as the keystone power of Judicial Review. Through this landmark Supreme Court Judgment Judicial Review (the premise that a court system may oversee and nullify actions of another branch of government) was affirmed and formally established in this case. Marbury v. Madison is viewed as a historical and fundamental court decision that effectively altered the way a judicial body reviewed a case in alignment with a country’s constitution. This landmark Supreme Court Case was the first in the history of any judicial system to deem a ruling unconstitutional.

Dred Scott v Sanford (1857): This landmark Supreme Court judgment classified slaves as personal property. Although this ruling would be modified with subsequent legislation, this particular landmark Supreme Court Case essentially fueled the flames that led to the Civil War.

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954): A landmark Supreme Court judgment that acted as a groundbreaking step towards civil rights and the delivery of equal rights for all citizens of the United States. Brown v. Board of Education effectively ended the segregation of public schools throughout the United States of America.

NAACP v. Alabama (1958): A landmark Supreme Court judgment which protected the Freedom of association; this ruling enabled citizens of the United States to assemble in groups for a common political or human-rights based objective.

Wesberry v. Sanders (1964): The landmark Supreme Court case that declared each person’s vote to carry an equal measure.

Roe v. Wade (1973): A highly controversial Supreme Court judgment, which rules that states can and can and cannot control legality issues in regards to abortions.

United States v Nixon (1974): A landmark Supreme Court judgment that limited the President’s “Executive Privilege”, which in essence, limited the Commander and Chief’s authority and ability to exercise particular powers .