The Supreme Court has been handling and making major decisions on some debatable cases recently. The cases are controversial and many people are opinionated on these topics. Initially, the article id discussing about the ruling in Michigan concerning Affirmative Action and their ban on it. Supreme Court justice Sotomayor clearly disagreed with the ruling. Her 58 page dissenting opinion was read to all of the judges. Her main concern was that race still matters and it still matters due to the fact that there was an elongated history of racial inequality in our country. There are also still ongoing social and economic inequalities because of race. Even personal judgments continue in our society. Affirmative Action can also seem like discrimination or reversal discrimination which does technically violate the United States Constitution, but until it is amended, we must obey the country's laws. This kind of an issue can be a social problem because those who reside in a minority situation can be subjected into staying in that kind of a situation. Affirmative Action benefits the minority by trying to give them more opportunities for growth and success. By banning the Affirmative Action act, it will only cause an ongoing gap between those with little chances for achievement and those with more favorable circumstances. Though some will argue that Affirmative Action is still indeed reverse discrimination, it is still fair considering the external factors that most do not consider. Much discrimination occurs to those with low socio-economic status, race, and gender. The article also runs through a court case that seemed to have violated the fourth amendment, unreasonable search and seizures. An anonymous tipster called police and claimed that a car was driving recklessly and tried to run them off the road. When the police stopped the car, they uncovered an abundance of marijuana; the man was arrested. It is controversial because it raises the question, can an anonymous tip be enough to be pulled over and have your property searched without a true motive? This is a social problem because it can seem to society that more of their rights are being taken away and their lives are too controlled. By law, the police have to have a viable reason, like a car running red lights, or swerving, to actual pull over a car. But there is also a counter argument for police officers which say that if in their minds they have probable cause to pull over a vehicle, then it can be allowed. These cases are double-sided and judges must follow precedent in order to make an appropriate decision. This case debating the violation of the fourth amendment ended up in favor of the police. Another controversial case was concerning child pornography and who they can sue for restitution. This kind of an issue can play a role in societal problems because the victims can go through much psychological stress which can affect them throughout their livelihood.
These court case issues can be deciphered in many different perspectives. Pertaining to the Affirmative Action case, a conflict theorist would conclude that the ban is necessary for society. The beliefs that there should be a gap between people. The ban will cause, once again, a larger space between the minorities and majorities. The less fortunate will continue to live unfortunately and the fortunate will continue to live and thrive fortunately. An Interactionist would say about the case considering the violation of the fourth amendment, which the actions that took place did go against our constitutional rights. On a personal level, an individual should not be stripped of their rights with one anonymous phone call. This creates an excuse for police officers to pull over any individual they would like and claim the reason they did it was because of an anonymous tip. Essentially this creates a situation where no one is safe from the law enforcement. The case pertaining to child pornography6 can also be seen through the eyes of an interactionist. The victim will be personally affected by this kind of a situation, and the individual must go through the ordeals of overcoming them in society.
The chosen cases by the Supreme Court are indeed controversial. It raises many questions in our own minds to whether their decisions are constitutional or not. I am on the dissenting side when it comes to the case about Affirmative Action. Affirmative Action is beneficial and gives more hope and prosperity to those labeled in the minority. The case discussing the pulled over car, I would be on the concurring side. The police are placed in our society to protect and serve the people and they should be able to pull over an individual even on an anonymous tip. The last court case discussed easy for me to agree with. The victims do deserve to get restitution. It is interesting to see that the nine Supreme Court judges had a close decision of 5-4 ruling. I commented on this particular article because these rulings will affect everyone one and in the future. Whatever the judges decided on these cases will become the precedent of future court cases. Citizens need to be aware of all of their rights, so they do not get taken advantage of by the government or the justice department. As human beings, we should be conscious of what the legal system is debating and ruling on. It is important to be knowledgeable about these court hearings and rulings so we can be able to defend ourselves if a higher power was trying to dictate us. I do not see any major problems that need to be fixed when it comes to our Supreme Courts choices in cases or their rulings. Maybe the fact that these judges get appointed by the president and serve life terms can be an issue. This can cause discrimination and biased within the judiciary branch. I do not think there is a way to actually change this kind of a law, unless the crowds speak up. A solution to fix the discrimination is tricky and complex. An individual is capable of discrimination, but trying to prevent it from higher powers can be achieved. Being knowledgeable about your own rights and knowing what can protect you is beneficial form succumbing to the unfairness of discrimination.
In reply to Vanessa M. I agree with what she is saying about the supreme court. I also agree with Vanessa that this is a social problem because it means that people will feel like they are being too controlled. The justices gave their opinions and they were not all well received yet they all had some good points. What stood out to me in Vanessa's comments was that she described the cases and the way that they were looked at. All stories have two sides and the judges and jury does not always see it both ways. they are responsible for ruling one way or the other on cases and they cannot afford to see the issue from both sides. These cases do not always get to be seen objectively by the jury because one side or the other can represent the facts in a way that can skew the judge and jury opinion. Race is a big factor in this because of peoples preconceptions and how those preconceptions can be used to get a ruling to be in favor of someone or against them. From a interactionist perspective, these behaviors are learned from our society. They would say that there is no way to stop the violations of our laws and constitution unless society becomes more open to change and less prejudiced. They would think that if people do not teach each other how to be more accepting then they cannot change. People cannot change unless they want to and know that what they are doing is wrong. One way to solve this problem would be to teach police and other law enforcement ways of not discriminating against people just because of race. This could also be helpful for future rulings and decisions because that way they can be objective and not base their decisions on peoples race.
4 comments:
The Supreme Court has been handling and making major decisions on some debatable cases recently. The cases are controversial and many people are opinionated on these topics. Initially, the article id discussing about the ruling in Michigan concerning Affirmative Action and their ban on it. Supreme Court justice Sotomayor clearly disagreed with the ruling. Her 58 page dissenting opinion was read to all of the judges. Her main concern was that race still matters and it still matters due to the fact that there was an elongated history of racial inequality in our country. There are also still ongoing social and economic inequalities because of race. Even personal judgments continue in our society. Affirmative Action can also seem like discrimination or reversal discrimination which does technically violate the United States Constitution, but until it is amended, we must obey the country's laws. This kind of an issue can be a social problem because those who reside in a minority situation can be subjected into staying in that kind of a situation. Affirmative Action benefits the minority by trying to give them more opportunities for growth and success. By banning the Affirmative Action act, it will only cause an ongoing gap between those with little chances for achievement and those with more favorable circumstances. Though some will argue that Affirmative Action is still indeed reverse discrimination, it is still fair considering the external factors that most do not consider. Much discrimination occurs to those with low socio-economic status, race, and gender. The article also runs through a court case that seemed to have violated the fourth amendment, unreasonable search and seizures. An anonymous tipster called police and claimed that a car was driving recklessly and tried to run them off the road. When the police stopped the car, they uncovered an abundance of marijuana; the man was arrested. It is controversial because it raises the question, can an anonymous tip be enough to be pulled over and have your property searched without a true motive? This is a social problem because it can seem to society that more of their rights are being taken away and their lives are too controlled. By law, the police have to have a viable reason, like a car running red lights, or swerving, to actual pull over a car. But there is also a counter argument for police officers which say that if in their minds they have probable cause to pull over a vehicle, then it can be allowed. These cases are double-sided and judges must follow precedent in order to make an appropriate decision. This case debating the violation of the fourth amendment ended up in favor of the police. Another controversial case was concerning child pornography and who they can sue for restitution. This kind of an issue can play a role in societal problems because the victims can go through much psychological stress which can affect them throughout their livelihood.
CONTINUED:
These court case issues can be deciphered in many different perspectives. Pertaining to the Affirmative Action case, a conflict theorist would conclude that the ban is necessary for society. The beliefs that there should be a gap between people. The ban will cause, once again, a larger space between the minorities and majorities. The less fortunate will continue to live unfortunately and the fortunate will continue to live and thrive fortunately. An Interactionist would say about the case considering the violation of the fourth amendment, which the actions that took place did go against our constitutional rights. On a personal level, an individual should not be stripped of their rights with one anonymous phone call. This creates an excuse for police officers to pull over any individual they would like and claim the reason they did it was because of an anonymous tip. Essentially this creates a situation where no one is safe from the law enforcement. The case pertaining to child pornography6 can also be seen through the eyes of an interactionist. The victim will be personally affected by this kind of a situation, and the individual must go through the ordeals of overcoming them in society.
The chosen cases by the Supreme Court are indeed controversial. It raises many questions in our own minds to whether their decisions are constitutional or not. I am on the dissenting side when it comes to the case about Affirmative Action. Affirmative Action is beneficial and gives more hope and prosperity to those labeled in the minority. The case discussing the pulled over car, I would be on the concurring side. The police are placed in our society to protect and serve the people and they should be able to pull over an individual even on an anonymous tip. The last court case discussed easy for me to agree with. The victims do deserve to get restitution. It is interesting to see that the nine Supreme Court judges had a close decision of 5-4 ruling. I commented on this particular article because these rulings will affect everyone one and in the future. Whatever the judges decided on these cases will become the precedent of future court cases. Citizens need to be aware of all of their rights, so they do not get taken advantage of by the government or the justice department. As human beings, we should be conscious of what the legal system is debating and ruling on. It is important to be knowledgeable about these court hearings and rulings so we can be able to defend ourselves if a higher power was trying to dictate us. I do not see any major problems that need to be fixed when it comes to our Supreme Courts choices in cases or their rulings. Maybe the fact that these judges get appointed by the president and serve life terms can be an issue. This can cause discrimination and biased within the judiciary branch. I do not think there is a way to actually change this kind of a law, unless the crowds speak up. A solution to fix the discrimination is tricky and complex. An individual is capable of discrimination, but trying to prevent it from higher powers can be achieved. Being knowledgeable about your own rights and knowing what can protect you is beneficial form succumbing to the unfairness of discrimination.
BOTH ENTRIES ARE FROM
VANESSA MARTINEZ!
In reply to Vanessa M.
I agree with what she is saying about the supreme court. I also agree with Vanessa that this is a social problem because it means that people will feel like they are being too controlled. The justices gave their opinions and they were not all well received yet they all had some good points. What stood out to me in Vanessa's comments was that she described the cases and the way that they were looked at. All stories have two sides and the judges and jury does not always see it both ways. they are responsible for ruling one way or the other on cases and they cannot afford to see the issue from both sides. These cases do not always get to be seen objectively by the jury because one side or the other can represent the facts in a way that can skew the judge and jury opinion. Race is a big factor in this because of peoples preconceptions and how those preconceptions can be used to get a ruling to be in favor of someone or against them. From a interactionist perspective, these behaviors are learned from our society. They would say that there is no way to stop the violations of our laws and constitution unless society becomes more open to change and less prejudiced. They would think that if people do not teach each other how to be more accepting then they cannot change. People cannot change unless they want to and know that what they are doing is wrong. One way to solve this problem would be to teach police and other law enforcement ways of not discriminating against people just because of race. This could also be helpful for future rulings and decisions because that way they can be objective and not base their decisions on peoples race.
Post a Comment