- According to MLK, how can we tell the difference between just and unjust laws? Understanding these questions is the most important part of this module, and I will ask it again during our second exam
According to Dr. Martin Luther King, a just law is a law that is of God, that inspires humans
personally. An unjust law is a law that devalues humans personally. The bias laws encourage
supremacy to the oppressors, causing the oppressed to feel subjection. By way of illustration,
segregation is an unjust law because it is demeaning, destroying the soul of the oppressed. One
that breaks the law to raise awareness for injustice and accepts responsibility for being
imprisoned is acting justly.
- In your view, is this an important distinction (between just and unjust laws), do you think it makes a difference in the way someone (as an individual, or our society as a whole) lives their lives? Can it affect our politics?
Just and unjust law is that an unjust law is made by the majority in order to force the minority to follow while a just law is still made by the majority but implemented with the consent and voluntary participation of the minority. Secondly, he suggests that any law that differentiates and discriminates people based on race, religion, ethnicity and social status are unjust laws. This means he wanted people to fight the unjust laws with just and peaceful ways. Finally, any law which doesn’t align with the moral law of god should be considered as unjust laws. This would mean these man made code of laws are incompatible with the god given moral laws thus, discriminating people based on certain man made institutions.
3. Based on our discussion of Question 1, give an example of an unjust and just law, in the US today. Explain what makes it unjust or just (using MLK’s definition of those two types of laws
Civil Forfeiture law is considered as one of the unjust laws in the United States. In this law the property of one is seized by the Government only in charge of criminal association without any proof. This law violates human rights. King says that just laws are created in keeping balance with the law and morality of God. Just law never contradicts humanity. It never violates human rights. The Civil Forfeiture law opposes humanity. It is forcefully imposed. Therefore it is an unjust law.
- What did the Supreme Court decide in the Wal-Mart case? And more importantly, how did it justify its decision? (HINT: the key word here is “commonality” (and how it related to “class-action lawsuit”). Try to understand what this legal terms means, as it is key to the court’s decision).
In the Wal-Mart case lawsuit against his former employer, for disability discrimination and intentional infliction of emotional distress. According to Wal Mart, Canchola was terminated for violating the company’s sexual harassment policies. After a jury trial, the trial court rendered judgment in Canchola’s favor. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment. Wal-Mart challenges the judgment on a number of grounds, including the legal sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury’s verdict. The Supreme Court announced that the company was ought to compensate for each and every employee that was working at the time when the store abruptly shut. To me the U.s Supreme Court was partitioned. Notwithstanding the way that the high court never gave a decision looking into the issue preferences, the somewhat misguided choice safe houses ladies who worked at Wal-Mart from handling America’s greatest private executive as a brought together gathering the country over constraining every lady to by and by record her suppositions or rather in therapist, activity bunches. The incomparable court disregarded more than forty years of respectable statute and persistently obliged the shots of the specialists to fight separation as a class movement unit. All the more essentially, the court’s tremendously traditionalist judgment gave a ton of center to the sheer frequency of a corporate against separation structure, in spite of the way that the skeleton appeared to be not to have been stuck to. The court’s choice appears to give a dim future sign to further laborers class activity cases and a guaranteeing future for bosses to proceed utilizing very biased compensation and sex separation exercises.
- In what ways is the court system better suited to protect the individual, than are the elected branches of government (such as Congress and the President; or the Mayor of NYC and the NYC City Assembly)? Give an example to illustrate your argument.
The court system in New York City has a job to protect individuals and make sure nothing goes against the constitution, whereas the elected branches of government are more to create and enforce the new legislation. The Supreme Court Judges are not impacted by the popular conclusion. They are not chosen by the individuals and they serve deep-rooted terms. Along these lines, they are more ready to take on dubious cases than chose authorities. A good example can be Miranda v. Arizona, setting up the rule that all criminal suspects should be instructed concerning their rights before interrogation. Presently viewed as standard police procedure, they reserve the privilege to stay quiet. Anything you say can, and will, be utilized against you in the courtroom. they reserve the privilege of an attorney. On the off chance that you can’t bear the cost of one, one will be selected to you, has been heard so often in television and film shows that it has become nearly antique. They chose to separate however the equivalent is characteristically inconsistent. They took on a dubious point to ensure the individuals even though it was anything but a politically well-known choice. While the U.S. The Supreme Court and state supreme courts apply control over numerous people while evaluating laws or pronouncing demonstrations of different branches illegally, they become especially significant when a solitary individual precedes them with a supposed wrong. Sorting out fights, accumulating specific vested party support, and changing laws through the authoritative and official branches are for the most part conceivable, however, an individual is well on the way to discover the courts most appropriate to break down points of interest. As a major aspect of balanced governance, courts shield the Constitution from ruptures by different parts of government, and they secure individual rights against cultural and legislative persecution.
2. Think about how federal judges get to become judges – unlike Presidents, Mayors, and members of Congress (and other legislatures), they are not elected, but rather appointed. Many Americans have thus called the federal courts system, and especially the Supreme Court, anti-democratic PLACES IN OUR GOVERNMENT. Do you agree that the Supreme Court, for example, is an anti-democratic part of our government? What could be the reason for this way of choosing judges in federal courts? (HINT: think about our discussion of “Federalist #10”, and which social class plays a leading role in our government system.)
The US constitution states that the federal judges can hold office for a lifetime “during good behavior”. It has been argued that good behavior is to make it clear that the federal judges can retain office for a lifetime. They can only be removed through proper constitutional apparatus. It further states that judicial appointment by the president should potentially survive his administration which will provide them a political legacy. Furthermore, it is also assumed that the appointment power by the president allows them to identify candidates and appoint judges who will favor the policies and practices of the president. Therefore, the ‘good behavior clause’ has always been a controversial topic of the US constitution. In my opinion the Supreme Court on the other hand is the apex court and has got all the powers provided in the constitution. It is above the other two branches in terms of power and is the final judicial authority in the US. The order given by the Supreme Court is the final one and no other court can overturn the decision or order of the Supreme Court and the parties have to abide by that judgement and respect it. I agree The Supreme Court is a protector of liberty and democracy and not a potential threat to them since the Supreme Court acts for provision of democratic rights to the citizens and also acts for their liberty and freedom. It acts as a protector of liberty, freedom and democracy and provides judgement that is in sync with the democratic rights of citizens and for their upliftment and development as well.
- The war on terror was responded to by projecting U.S. military power on a global scale. In the months following the attacks, the administration was forcefully evicted.
2. The roving wiretaps seem in contradiction to the fourth amendment of the constitution deals with the protection of unreasonable search and seizure. To avoid the increasing incidences of illegal search and seizure the court came up with the concept of the exclusionary rule. Exclusionary Rule is a process where the pieces of evidence that are collected illegally and are in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used in the criminal trial against the victim of these illegal search and seizure. The exclusionary rights apply only to the Fourth Amendment search and seizure cases and it does not apply to the violation of any other constitutional right mentioned in the Bill of Rights. For example, in the case of US v. Leon, the Supreme Court declared that exclusionary rule is used and created as a judicial remedy to safeguard Fourth Amendment rights. Hence, it did not include any other constitutional right in it. In case the US v. Patane, which includes violation of Miranda Rights, the Supreme Court declared that the self- incrimination clause has its own exclusionary rule and thus no exclusionary rule applied to Fifth Amendment or any other constitutional amendment violation except Fourth Amendment
3. “Sneak and Peek” as a viable law enforcement technique and reviews court cases that have addressed the legal issues involved in the execution of such warrants. The Fourth Amendment provides the right for the people to protect their properties against unreasonable searches and seizures. The law is to protect the people’s right to privacy and freedom from unreasonable intrusion from the government. Most warrantless searches are prohibited under the fourth amendment but there are certain exceptions. Warrantless searches and seizures of properties are not illegal if the objects are in plain view. The seizure of properties in an open field also is not a violation of Fourth Amendment. In this case police collected the samples from the air and it is in plain view and collected from an open field. Hence the police did not violate Fourth Amendment; the seizure of air samples is legal and the company cannot suppress the evidence.
1. In the federal system, citizens vote for representatives. In the confederation system, citizens will have more power because this system pretty much relies on its local governments. In the unitary system, citizens pretty much leave everything to the central government. In a federation, the federal government will be subordinate to it; the central authority of a confederation is usually a weak body appointed by the member states. The centrally authorized federation is a federal government that governs the states. In a unitary system, only one government is in control, and that is the central government. On the other hand, a confederate system is when the smaller government in terms of counties, provinces, and states yield more power than the central government
2. The power to decide between them in any case of dispute should not reside in either of the governments, or any functionary subject to it, but an umpire independent of both. the principle that sovereignty should be divided between the federal government and the states especially as expressed by the Constitution of the U.S. All the equipment in the power system needs to be protected from short circuit faults, open circuit faults, lightning surges, and outages of the equipment. The faulty section of the power system should be isolated from the healthy section of the power system within a minimum amount of time so that the interruption for the healthy section is minimum.
3 The covid 19 pandemics at all levels of government congress has enacted legislation and the president and the executive agencies promulgated rules and regulations and taken other action to implement responses to covid 19 to alleviate economic and societal impacts. The coronavirus pandemic has prompted a comprehensive government response from the federal state. The local government has enacted legislation to stimulate the economy and promote a robust public health response; it has also implemented policies through agency regulations and temporary rules to utilize the funding provided by Congress. State governments have approached the situation in a more varied way, targeting their specific population with public health policy and economic responses. Local governments have responded within the framework of power delegated to them by theirs. The coronavirus pandemic has prompted a comprehensive government response from the federal states and local government has enacted legislation to the economy and promote a public health response.
- The Lemon test is a three-part test that the Supreme Court uses to determine whether a law violates the establishment clause of the first amendment which says that congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise. The three parts of the Lemon test are that law must have a secular purpose, the law’s principal or primary purpose can neither advance nor inhibit religion and the government may not be excessively entangled in religion.
2. According to the reading, burning the US flag was constitutes a form of “symbolic speech” that is protected by the First Amendment. This is supported by a precedent Supreme Court case Texas v. Johnson. The majority noted that freedom of speech protects actions that society may find very offensive, but society’s outrage alone is not justification for suppressing free speech. In particular, the majority noted that the Texas law discriminated against viewpoint although the law punished actions, such as flag burning, that might arouse anger in others, it specifically exempted from prosecution actions that were respectful of venerated objects burning and burying a worn-out flag. The majority said that the government could not discriminate in this manner based solely upon viewpoint.
3. “Taking the fifth” refers to The Fifth Amendment to the constitution of the USA regarding private property states that no one should be deprived of property without due process of law; Nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.” This amendment provided exclusive economic rights to the private property owner. In case the government acquired the property for military bases, and so forth, courts must estimate the fair value of the property to be paid to the owners.
- Based on the arguments presented in Readings 6.1 and 6.2, which social class wrote the Constitution, and which class was excluded and not allowed to participate in this process? In your comment, make sure you clearly specify the difference between the two classes by giving examples from the readings.
The social class who wrote the constitution was the Owners Class. Those in support of the ratification of the Constitution to replace the Articles of Confederation. They included the Founding Fathers. Other members tended to be involved in commerce and live in urban areas. Those who opposed the ratification of the Constitution and supported the continuation of the Articles of Confederation because the Constitution placed too much power into the hands of the federal government. They tended to include people from more rural areas that were less reliant on commerce.
Would say that the social class structure of early United States society, was the same as ours today, or different? Explain.
Social class, race, and gender inequality were to disappear in the United States, then the inequality in the society will end up. There will be no difference on the basis of class, race, gender. Also the basis of violence reduced. The social relationships throughout society will be very competitive with each other. Now everybody’s the same, so each one wants to be the best of themselves or to others. In this process the social inequality will be reduced, but economic and psychological pressure will increase.
- Why were the people who wrote the Constitution so afraid of democracy? Hint: think about how to answer this question by discussing it in terms of social classes
I think that the Constitution can be defined as a written instrument embodying the rules of a political or social organization and the basic principles and laws of a nation, state, or social group that determine the powers and duties of the government and guarantee certain rights to the people in it.
- Do you notice any similarities in the way social class is discussed in readings 4.1 and 4.2? Do you notice any differences in the way these two readings DIFFERENTIATE between social classes?
They are based on percentages, there are parallels in both articles. Both points of view used income to determine social class structure, which is a remarkable parallel. Reading 4.1 explores the wealth disparity in further depth. Other elements that might influence one’s impression of social standing were investigated as well. Income, wealth, occupational percentages, and educational level all contribute to socioeconomic status, which is determined by one’s place in the social hierarchy.
- Pick the station closest to where you live. Using the concepts from Reading 4.1, what social class tends to live in your neighborhood? Are you surprised (or not) by the answer? Do you feel it is an accurate representation of the people living in your neighborhood?
The stop that is closest to me is Crescent St in brooklyn. Despite the fact that this is a middle-class neighborhood, the income of $43,672 astonished me. People from the same social class, on the other hand, share similar opinions, lifestyles, and habits. I also believe that social mobility occurs when people’s economic circumstances improve or deteriorate in a way that impacts their social class. For a variety of causes, individuals can move up or down the social ladder. An increase or movement in social status is referred to as upward mobility.
- Based on Reading 4.2, do you notice a general pattern about social classes in NYC?
Based on the reading 4.2 the highest class may be found in Manhattan. It does not exceed me since it is a highly costly city where the majority of educated people work and where the economy may improve.
- The difference between owners and employees is that owners benefit from the value of their workers’ excess work, whereas workers are people who sell their work to owners for a livable wage. Unless they work as an employee in addition to owning a firm, company owners do not receive a paycheck or pay taxes as employees. Most of the employees are not taxed on the money you take out of the business as a business owner save for corporate shareholders. For example, as an employee, you are going to exchange your time for money. Employees manage the business. Owners manage the people, if your owner corporation offers employee group benefits, you can legally give yourself the same benefits as other employees. Some benefits, such as participating in health savings accounts, may not be available to you as an owner/employee. Other benefits apply even if you don’t meet the owner-employee definition.
- Accounting to the quote Adam Smith believes that people performing these specialized tasks is a good thing. It is good for both workers and society. For Smith, the division of labor built upon two natural propensities in human nature and in doing so created the possibility for greater efficiency, cheaper production, and more jobs. He also valued the division of labor for facilitating human cooperation and understanding on a mass scale.the benefits of division of labour include.
3. In socialists’ view, class is not an identity; rather, it is a structural position in which all activities are predicated on the interdependency between capital and employees, with each pursuing a rational strategy to maintain that position. The United States is capitalist with socialist aspects. It is a mixed economy. While a market economy operates in the United States, the government also controls several industries.
4. Dependency is directly correlated with power. The more you are dependent on that resource, the more power they would have on you. The example of someone on whom I was dependent was my project manager in my previous internship where the manager was responsible for my internship certificate and also letter of appreciation. I was dependent on him because of these two important resources as it was a part of my summer training project for my exam. It was important for me to score well and thus, I wanted my letter of appreciation to be as good as possible, making me depend on my manager for the same.
The format that represents the daily activities of the capitalist class is as follows: (M-C-C+ -M+).
M-C constitutes the capital invested and commodities that are needed to make a profit. C-C+
represents the business of the market that is open to selling. C+-M represents the new
commodities created and sold for profits. An example of M-C is a person that wants to open a
Subway restaurant. They would have to invest in the franchise, then rent the store, buy all the
material like the dough for the bread, cheese meats, condiments and hire staff. C-C is when the
commodities are sold, the dough is baked in the bread, the sandwiches are made and sold. C+M is where the investor received the gains of what he investment often doubling the amount of the
initial investment.The formula that represents the daily activities of the working class is illustrated as (C-M-C). The working class begins with (C-M) because the individual must work in order to obtain money.