1. Source:
Lindsay Lohan Court Arrest, 30 Day Bail Sentence, Bail and Rehab Denied!
http://www.astrochicks.com/2010/09/lindsay-lohan-court-arrest-30-day-jail-sentence-bail-and-rehab-denied/. September 24, 2010
2. Constitution Connection:
Eight Amendment
"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
3. Explanation of Connection:
The article was an summary of what happened to Lindsay Lohan. After she had failed two drug test a judge had ordered her to so days in jail without bail. It also mentioned her mother and father. Also, that she had run out of chances. Her father tried to get her out but the judge would not allow it.
The amendment says that "excessive bail shall not required", and in this case no excessive bail was fined because the judge denied her bail. Also, her punishment was not cruel because because she did not have to go to prison nor was she sentenced. It was only a court order. Nothing was unusual about this because she had broken the law twice and for that she lightly punished. The judge did not make her get her limbs cut off, or make her have to shave her head, or indure public shame.
In my opinion, the judge was very soft on her. She broke the law twice and only had to sit in jail for 30 days. Other people who would have did the same thing would have been in there for three times as much time as she was. She was not very smart to get caught twice. So i believe she need a reality check and need to get her life in order. She was alrewady in rehab, that shows she wanted change. But where is the commitment?
Friday, September 24, 2010
Sixth Amendment
1. Source:
Sixth Amendment
http://www.toondoo.com/cartoon/380984. October 3, 2008
2. Constituional Connection:
The Sixth Amendment
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial..."
3. Explanation of Connection:
The cartoon explains how a person could use his or her rights to quickly get out a problem dealing with givernment. In this cartoon, the character uses her right to a speedy trial. Things that are important to look at are the officers uniform, his or face, the age of the lady. Usually a police officer wear a blue uniform, but this officer had unfiorm of someone that is in the army. The fact that the officer didnt have facial features could be that the artist didnt want someone to have personal attachment to him. He/she wanted us to just look at the officer.
At first the elderly lady was frantic and kind of upset that she had gotten arrested. She thought it was going to take tons of her time to get through it. Until she learned her rights. She found that through the Sixth Amendment she did not have to go through a long process. She could enjoy a speedy trail. This shows usefulness because the elder woman had other priorities, in this case grocery shopping, and was able to complete her task because of the Sixth Amendment. This could happen to anyone and the may be have other priorities to attend to that may be greater in importance than the elderly lady.
The first frame was kind of weird to me because the elderly woman was not doing anything illegal.Which made me believe that the artist was questioning the opinion of the government. He seem like the artist was trying to say that anyone could be arrested at anytime for no reason at all. I also wonder why the artist made the elderly woman soo focused on grocery shopping, because you can grocery shop any day. Which made me futhermore think the artist was trying to portray the lady as just trying to get out of her situation.
Sixth Amendment
http://www.toondoo.com/cartoon/380984. October 3, 2008
2. Constituional Connection:
The Sixth Amendment
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial..."
3. Explanation of Connection:
The cartoon explains how a person could use his or her rights to quickly get out a problem dealing with givernment. In this cartoon, the character uses her right to a speedy trial. Things that are important to look at are the officers uniform, his or face, the age of the lady. Usually a police officer wear a blue uniform, but this officer had unfiorm of someone that is in the army. The fact that the officer didnt have facial features could be that the artist didnt want someone to have personal attachment to him. He/she wanted us to just look at the officer.
At first the elderly lady was frantic and kind of upset that she had gotten arrested. She thought it was going to take tons of her time to get through it. Until she learned her rights. She found that through the Sixth Amendment she did not have to go through a long process. She could enjoy a speedy trail. This shows usefulness because the elder woman had other priorities, in this case grocery shopping, and was able to complete her task because of the Sixth Amendment. This could happen to anyone and the may be have other priorities to attend to that may be greater in importance than the elderly lady.
The first frame was kind of weird to me because the elderly woman was not doing anything illegal.Which made me believe that the artist was questioning the opinion of the government. He seem like the artist was trying to say that anyone could be arrested at anytime for no reason at all. I also wonder why the artist made the elderly woman soo focused on grocery shopping, because you can grocery shop any day. Which made me futhermore think the artist was trying to portray the lady as just trying to get out of her situation.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Tenth Amendment
1.Source:
Arizona Governor Signs Immigration Bill. April 23, 2010
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-04-23/politics/obama.immigration_1_illegal-immigration-immigration-laws-arizona-gov?_s=PM:POLITICS
2.Constitutional Connection:
The Tenth Amendment
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
3.Explanation Of Connection:
This newspaper article revealed Governor Jan Brewer signing a immigration bill that requires the police of Arizona whether or not a person is legally there. The bill also makes it a necessity that all immigrants must carry their alien registration documents at all times and give police the right to question anyone if they have reason to suspect.Also, the governor issued an executive order that requires alll officers to take training so they would not be charged with racial profiling.
This article is clear evidence that the Tenth Amendment is being applied to today's society. The constitution did not specificly give the power to do what Arizona is doing. So they took it upon themselves, and backing them up is Tenth Amendment. It states "powers not delegated....are reserved to the States." The power of the state, in this case, is the Governor Brewer. By her physically signing a bill, which the constitution does not disagree with makes this state actions "constutionally okay". Meaing they can do this.
Looking from the immigrants point of view i dont believe it is fair. I would think that it was an power abuse. The article mentioned, "illegal is not a race; its a crime." I agree with this statement. Just because they are not American does not mean they are doing wrong or breaking any serious law. But from a citizens point of view i wouldnt mind the bill. If i were a worker and there where many immigrants in the same field as me i would want them gone simply because it would give me a better chance at a job.
Arizona Governor Signs Immigration Bill. April 23, 2010
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-04-23/politics/obama.immigration_1_illegal-immigration-immigration-laws-arizona-gov?_s=PM:POLITICS
2.Constitutional Connection:
The Tenth Amendment
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
3.Explanation Of Connection:
This newspaper article revealed Governor Jan Brewer signing a immigration bill that requires the police of Arizona whether or not a person is legally there. The bill also makes it a necessity that all immigrants must carry their alien registration documents at all times and give police the right to question anyone if they have reason to suspect.Also, the governor issued an executive order that requires alll officers to take training so they would not be charged with racial profiling.
This article is clear evidence that the Tenth Amendment is being applied to today's society. The constitution did not specificly give the power to do what Arizona is doing. So they took it upon themselves, and backing them up is Tenth Amendment. It states "powers not delegated....are reserved to the States." The power of the state, in this case, is the Governor Brewer. By her physically signing a bill, which the constitution does not disagree with makes this state actions "constutionally okay". Meaing they can do this.
Looking from the immigrants point of view i dont believe it is fair. I would think that it was an power abuse. The article mentioned, "illegal is not a race; its a crime." I agree with this statement. Just because they are not American does not mean they are doing wrong or breaking any serious law. But from a citizens point of view i wouldnt mind the bill. If i were a worker and there where many immigrants in the same field as me i would want them gone simply because it would give me a better chance at a job.
Second Amendment
1.Source:
Harlem Store Owner Shoots 4 Robbers, Killing 2. August 13, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/14/nyregion/14shoot.html?_r=2&hpw
2.Constitutional Connection:
Amendment 2
"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
3.Explanation of Connection:
Four criminals picked aHarlem shop to rob. As they tried to put plastic cuffs on two employees, beating one who resisted, 72-year old Charles Augusto Jr grabbed his shotgun. He killed one of attackers and wounded the second. The other two were also hit and fled bleeding. Both were found by police and arrested. Augusto, obviously acting in self-defense, was not charged.
This is an perfect example of a United States
Some people disagree with Mr.Augusto's. Believing that they are "ungodly" and "sinful". But i believe he did what was right. He didnt have any other choice. If he would have waited for police to arrive, his employees and himself could have been dead. Not only was he right but he did the smart thing. He saved two lives plus his own. The robbers actions were very ungodly and sinful. But who knows if they where religous or not. They where probably trying to find a way to survive or was so desperate for money that they had to do it.
Harlem Store Owner Shoots 4 Robbers, Killing 2. August 13, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/14/nyregion/14shoot.html?_r=2&hpw
2.Constitutional Connection:
Amendment 2
"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
3.Explanation of Connection:
Four criminals picked a
Some people disagree with Mr.Augusto's. Believing that they are "ungodly" and "sinful". But i believe he did what was right. He didnt have any other choice. If he would have waited for police to arrive, his employees and himself could have been dead. Not only was he right but he did the smart thing. He saved two lives plus his own. The robbers actions were very ungodly and sinful. But who knows if they where religous or not. They where probably trying to find a way to survive or was so desperate for money that they had to do it.
Friday, September 10, 2010
First Amendment
1. Source:
What We Owe Iraqis. September 10, 2010
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/09/AR2010090905389.html
2. Constitutional Connection:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
3. Explanation of Connection:
Thirty-five years ago, two young Foreign Service officers went AWOL from Henry Kissinger's staff at the State Department to go to Vietnam in the days before the collapse of Saigon.our action drew stern rebukes and orders that we be arrested and returned to the United States. they had each been posted in Vietnam. We went back there at our own expense and in defiance of our superiors because we were alarmed at the lack of planning on the part of our government regarding the well-being of our Vietnamese employees and allies as the end to the war approached. We believed that the United States had a moral obligation and a humanitarian responsibility to rescue those who had worked and sided with us on the battlefields of that unwinnable conflict. I noted the great pride that we all should feel over our response to the humanitarian crisis faced at the end of the war in Vietnam. Whatever one may feel about our involvement in that conflict, we rose, albeit belatedly, to the challenge of the humanitarian consequences of our actions. We should do no less in Iraq.
This article is a great example of the First Amendent. The First Amendment gives U.S. citizens the right to freedom of press. The author of this newpaper article demonstrated it by freely communicating and expressing through electronic media. Throughout this article there are no government interference, the author posted his own opinion. He also expresses his freedom of speech. Eventhough it isnt verbal it is still his words.
Without freedom of press or freedom of speech i believe there would be more prisons throughout the nation. One of underlying reasons the thirteen colonies came here from Britain is because of their lack of freedom of speech. They didnt want to be under monarchy. They wanted their voice to be heard. And because of that i believe they invluded freedom of speech foremost in the making of the constitution.
What We Owe Iraqis. September 10, 2010
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/09/AR2010090905389.html
2. Constitutional Connection:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
3. Explanation of Connection:
Thirty-five years ago, two young Foreign Service officers went AWOL from Henry Kissinger's staff at the State Department to go to Vietnam in the days before the collapse of Saigon.our action drew stern rebukes and orders that we be arrested and returned to the United States. they had each been posted in Vietnam. We went back there at our own expense and in defiance of our superiors because we were alarmed at the lack of planning on the part of our government regarding the well-being of our Vietnamese employees and allies as the end to the war approached. We believed that the United States had a moral obligation and a humanitarian responsibility to rescue those who had worked and sided with us on the battlefields of that unwinnable conflict. I noted the great pride that we all should feel over our response to the humanitarian crisis faced at the end of the war in Vietnam. Whatever one may feel about our involvement in that conflict, we rose, albeit belatedly, to the challenge of the humanitarian consequences of our actions. We should do no less in Iraq.
This article is a great example of the First Amendent. The First Amendment gives U.S. citizens the right to freedom of press. The author of this newpaper article demonstrated it by freely communicating and expressing through electronic media. Throughout this article there are no government interference, the author posted his own opinion. He also expresses his freedom of speech. Eventhough it isnt verbal it is still his words.
Without freedom of press or freedom of speech i believe there would be more prisons throughout the nation. One of underlying reasons the thirteen colonies came here from Britain is because of their lack of freedom of speech. They didnt want to be under monarchy. They wanted their voice to be heard. And because of that i believe they invluded freedom of speech foremost in the making of the constitution.
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Judicial Branch
1. Source:
Burris To High Court: Let Me Run. September 9, 2010
http://mobile.politico.com/story.cfm?id=41956&cat=politics
2. Constitutional Connection:
ArticleIII, Judicial Branch, Section 2, Clause1
"The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States."
3. Explanation of Connection:
New York Gov. David Paterson’s attempt to defuse the conflict over the so-called ground zero mosque by offering the group state land might seem like one possible path out of the controversy, but it would almost certainly to trigger serious legal challenges that could make the offer significantly less attractive. A plan by Islamic leaders to build a mosque and cultural center on private land two blocks from where the World Trade Center twin towers were attacked September 11, 2001 has been strongly opposed by those who say it would be an affront to the memories of those who died at ground zero that day.
This article demonstrates Article III, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution. The constitution gave the Supreme court power to handle caes like this. That deals with ownership and interest on a high scale. Even though the president added his comments and disagreed with idea of building the mosque in that significant area,it is within the Judicial branch where the power lies to have the overall ability to say yes or no. Before the Constitution those 13 colonies could have not effectively solved this without having to concern everyone. They could not settle the land, and The Articles of Confederation was not strong enough to to handle it, so the Land Ordinance had to be set forth. This was only a few years after the Articles where established.
Still to this day you can see how the Constitution stands in place. The Judicial branch is very helpful and eventhough The Articles failed it helped the United States become a stronger government. It does take quite a lot for case to be heard in the Supreme court. So if it were someone like me i wouldnt even putthat much effort inot it. It is plenty of land to build a mosque on.
Burris To High Court: Let Me Run. September 9, 2010
http://mobile.politico.com/story.cfm?id=41956&cat=politics
2. Constitutional Connection:
ArticleIII, Judicial Branch, Section 2, Clause1
"The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States."
3. Explanation of Connection:
New York Gov. David Paterson’s attempt to defuse the conflict over the so-called ground zero mosque by offering the group state land might seem like one possible path out of the controversy, but it would almost certainly to trigger serious legal challenges that could make the offer significantly less attractive. A plan by Islamic leaders to build a mosque and cultural center on private land two blocks from where the World Trade Center twin towers were attacked September 11, 2001 has been strongly opposed by those who say it would be an affront to the memories of those who died at ground zero that day.
This article demonstrates Article III, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution. The constitution gave the Supreme court power to handle caes like this. That deals with ownership and interest on a high scale. Even though the president added his comments and disagreed with idea of building the mosque in that significant area,it is within the Judicial branch where the power lies to have the overall ability to say yes or no. Before the Constitution those 13 colonies could have not effectively solved this without having to concern everyone. They could not settle the land, and The Articles of Confederation was not strong enough to to handle it, so the Land Ordinance had to be set forth. This was only a few years after the Articles where established.
Still to this day you can see how the Constitution stands in place. The Judicial branch is very helpful and eventhough The Articles failed it helped the United States become a stronger government. It does take quite a lot for case to be heard in the Supreme court. So if it were someone like me i wouldnt even putthat much effort inot it. It is plenty of land to build a mosque on.
Executive Branch
1. Source:
Obama Nears Pivotal Mideast Movement. August 30, 2010
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/08/ap-obama-mideast-083010/
2. Constitutional Connection:
Article II, The Executive Branch, Section 2, Clause 1
"The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments."
3. Explanation of Connection:
President Barack Obama is about to formally end the divisive U.S. combat role in Iraq and restart talks between Israelis and Palestinians, a moment defined more by relief and hope than triumph. Obama will tell the nation from the Oval Office that the U.S. role in Iraq has changed for good, with the remaining U.S. troops to play a supporting role to Iraqi forces. It will be a milestone with no celebration or banners in a still unresolved war, one that wages on years longer and at greater cost than most Americans ever imagined. The U.S. role in the war was already on a path to end when Obama took office. All U.S. troops are set to leave Iraq by the end of 2011.
This is an Perfect example of Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution. It illustrates President Obama taking over with his executive power. He did this by using his power of Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. Because he is Commander-in-Chief , along with other titles, he is entitled to end this "war" between "them and us." Some people had blamed the "weakness of the articles" for the inability of the government to form the army. But it could have been the lack of executive power that discontinued the progress.
i strongly believe that it was a good idea to put the power to control the army within the Executive branch, which the president is in. I would very nervous if was under the control of Legislative or Judicial branch because it is specifically set up to make laws and interpret laws. The constitution is very supporting of the 3 branches and makes sure they are equal. But what if the people where in control of the army. It would a great deal of conflict and mostly cause a civil war.
Obama Nears Pivotal Mideast Movement. August 30, 2010
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/08/ap-obama-mideast-083010/
2. Constitutional Connection:
Article II, The Executive Branch, Section 2, Clause 1
"The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments."
3. Explanation of Connection:
President Barack Obama is about to formally end the divisive U.S. combat role in Iraq and restart talks between Israelis and Palestinians, a moment defined more by relief and hope than triumph. Obama will tell the nation from the Oval Office that the U.S. role in Iraq has changed for good, with the remaining U.S. troops to play a supporting role to Iraqi forces. It will be a milestone with no celebration or banners in a still unresolved war, one that wages on years longer and at greater cost than most Americans ever imagined. The U.S. role in the war was already on a path to end when Obama took office. All U.S. troops are set to leave Iraq by the end of 2011.
This is an Perfect example of Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution. It illustrates President Obama taking over with his executive power. He did this by using his power of Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. Because he is Commander-in-Chief , along with other titles, he is entitled to end this "war" between "them and us." Some people had blamed the "weakness of the articles" for the inability of the government to form the army. But it could have been the lack of executive power that discontinued the progress.
i strongly believe that it was a good idea to put the power to control the army within the Executive branch, which the president is in. I would very nervous if was under the control of Legislative or Judicial branch because it is specifically set up to make laws and interpret laws. The constitution is very supporting of the 3 branches and makes sure they are equal. But what if the people where in control of the army. It would a great deal of conflict and mostly cause a civil war.
Legislative Branch
1. Source:
Tanning Salons To See 10% Tax Imposed. March 24, 2010
http://www.news4jax.com/health/22946052/detail.html
2. Constitutional Connection:
Article 1, The Legislative Branch, Section 8, Clause 1
"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States."
3. Explanation of Connection:
Along with other tax impositions, tanning salons are also becoming a part of "helping our government". Tanning salons will soon see a 10 percent tax handed down by the federal government as part of the new health care law. The tax money will help fund the $940 billion health care bill signed by President Barack Obama . The tax is expected to generate about $2.7 billion over a 10-year period.
This article "Tanning Salons to see 10% Tax Imposed" is a great example of Article 1, Section 8, Clause1 of the Constitution. This tax imposition was constitutional because it was part of the new health care law. Health care laws are in the interest of the "general welfare of the United States". This tax impostion was not just set for one state it was "uniform throughout the United States". Since the government made law for every Tanning salon it showed equality. Even though no one would be happy about it, there would be no worry about any state having exclusion. Equality was one of the greatest problems that was worried about before the constitution.
If Congress couldnt impose taxes then it would be like taking a step back in the Articles of Confederation, which we all know ended in failure. Taxes may not be good for your pockets at the time, but overall it is for a good reason and goes to a good cause. Just like the health care law. Personally i wish there could be another way the government could get money because when taxes are imposed MANY complaints arise. One Tanning Salon owner was worried of being wipped out of business because they operate on small profit. But, to me tanning is not a necessity and if i was apart of the gov. I probably would have chose the tanning salons to impose taxes on, along with other business'.
Tanning Salons To See 10% Tax Imposed. March 24, 2010
http://www.news4jax.com/health/22946052/detail.html
2. Constitutional Connection:
Article 1, The Legislative Branch, Section 8, Clause 1
"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States."
3. Explanation of Connection:
Along with other tax impositions, tanning salons are also becoming a part of "helping our government". Tanning salons will soon see a 10 percent tax handed down by the federal government as part of the new health care law. The tax money will help fund the $940 billion health care bill signed by President Barack Obama . The tax is expected to generate about $2.7 billion over a 10-year period.
This article "Tanning Salons to see 10% Tax Imposed" is a great example of Article 1, Section 8, Clause1 of the Constitution. This tax imposition was constitutional because it was part of the new health care law. Health care laws are in the interest of the "general welfare of the United States". This tax impostion was not just set for one state it was "uniform throughout the United States". Since the government made law for every Tanning salon it showed equality. Even though no one would be happy about it, there would be no worry about any state having exclusion. Equality was one of the greatest problems that was worried about before the constitution.
If Congress couldnt impose taxes then it would be like taking a step back in the Articles of Confederation, which we all know ended in failure. Taxes may not be good for your pockets at the time, but overall it is for a good reason and goes to a good cause. Just like the health care law. Personally i wish there could be another way the government could get money because when taxes are imposed MANY complaints arise. One Tanning Salon owner was worried of being wipped out of business because they operate on small profit. But, to me tanning is not a necessity and if i was apart of the gov. I probably would have chose the tanning salons to impose taxes on, along with other business'.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)