Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 191 views

    Woll Unit 5

    Uploaded by

    Grant Richman
    This document contains summaries of and questions about several Supreme Court cases and writings related to the power of judicial review and the right to abortion: - Federalist No. 78 discusses Hamilton's view that courts have the power to declare laws unconstitutional and arguments for lifetime appointments for judges. - Marbury v. Madison established the Supreme Court's power of judicial review. - Later sections discuss judicial self-restraint techniques, a Pledge of Allegiance case, and how the Supreme Court arrives at decisions. - Passages from Justice O'Connor, Chief Justice Rehnquist, and Justice Scalia debate precedent and the legal reasoning behind abortion rights decisions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Woll Unit 5

    Uploaded by

    Grant Richman
    191 views2 pages
    This document contains summaries of and questions about several Supreme Court cases and writings related to the power of judicial review and the right to abortion: - Federalist No. 78 discusses Hamilton's view that courts have the power to declare laws unconstitutional and arguments for lifetime appointments for judges. - Marbury v. Madison established the Supreme Court's power of judicial review. - Later sections discuss judicial self-restraint techniques, a Pledge of Allegiance case, and how the Supreme Court arrives at decisions. - Passages from Justice O'Connor, Chief Justice Rehnquist, and Justice Scalia debate precedent and the legal reasoning behind abortion rights decisions.

    Original Description:

    Unit 5 of the Woll Readings

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document contains summaries of and questions about several Supreme Court cases and writings related to the power of judicial review and the right to abortion: - Federalist No. 78 discusses Hamilton's view that courts have the power to declare laws unconstitutional and arguments for lifetime appointments for judges. - Marbury v. Madison established the Supreme Court's power of judicial review. - Later sections discuss judicial self-restraint techniques, a Pledge of Allegiance case, and how the Supreme Court arrives at decisions. - Passages from Justice O'Connor, Chief Justice Rehnquist, and Justice Scalia debate precedent and the legal reasoning behind abortion rights decisions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    191 views2 pages

    Woll Unit 5

    Uploaded by

    Grant Richman
    This document contains summaries of and questions about several Supreme Court cases and writings related to the power of judicial review and the right to abortion: - Federalist No. 78 discusses Hamilton's view that courts have the power to declare laws unconstitutional and arguments for lifetime appointments for judges. - Marbury v. Madison established the Supreme Court's power of judicial review. - Later sections discuss judicial self-restraint techniques, a Pledge of Allegiance case, and how the Supreme Court arrives at decisions. - Passages from Justice O'Connor, Chief Justice Rehnquist, and Justice Scalia debate precedent and the legal reasoning behind abortion rights decisions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    Federalist 78

    1. What was Hamilton's position regarding the power of the Judiciary to declare
    legislative acts contrary to the Constitution void?
    2. Why does Hamilton consider the independence of the judiciary to be a vital
    component of constitutional government?
    3. What arguments does Hamilton advance for establishing permanency of judicial
    offices?

    Marbury v. Madison
    Short Multiple Choice Quiz

    Judicial Self-Restraint
    1. Why does Roche state that "it is naive to assert that the Supreme Court is limited by
    the Constitution..."?
    2. To what extent has the judiciary been limited as the result of political demands to curb
    judicial discretion?
    3. What are the two major techniques of judicial self-restraint?
    ELK GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT et al. v. NEWDOW et. Al.
    The Pledge of Allegiance Case
    Short Multiple Choice Quiz

    How the Supreme Court Arrives at Decisions


    1. Evaluate Justice Brennens statement that the Court is not a council of Platonic
    guardians, nor involved in making social, political, economic, or philosophical decisions,
    these insofar as they concern government at all being properly the function of the
    peoples elected representatives. The justices are charged with deciding according to
    law...
    2. How does a case get docketed with the Supreme Court?
    3. Do you feel that the procedures of the Supreme Court described by Justice Brennen
    are adequate for the Court to meet its vast responsibilities?

    Constitutional Liberty and the Right to Abortion


    Justice Sandra Day OConnor
    1. Is OConnors argument about stare decisis convincing? Have facts changed within
    the gambit of the Roe decision? Is OConnor grasping at straws in order to uphold the
    earlier ruling? Is there a qualitative difference between the West Coast Hotel and Brown
    decisions and the situation surrounding Roe? Should this discussion even be a part of the
    decision, or should it have been left out?

    Liberty, Privacy, and the Right to Abortion


    Chief Justice William Rehnquist
    1. Is public opinion or the agreement of state and local law a necessary element in a
    fundamental right? Explain

    Liberty and Abortion: A Strict Constructionists View


    Justice Antonin Scalia
    1. Scalia argues that the Courts language defending the right to abortion might equally
    be used to defend other actions the Court has found are not protected rights. Is he right?
    Has he taken some of the language out of context? Is the court, in the abortion decisions,
    deciding on the basis of reason and law, or on the basis of political concerns and value
    judgments? Is the Court susceptible to continuing a decision just to keep from looking
    weak and indecisive in the face of protest?

    You might also like