Video as Text/Archive

2019 ◽  
pp. 778-797
Author(s):  
Bennett Capers
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Court Case ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Surveillance Cameras ◽  
American Law ◽  
Supreme Court Case ◽  
History Of ◽  
Constitutional Protections

This chapter focuses on a few issues related to video evidence and law, especially with respect to American law. The first issue is the history of the use of video evidence in court. The second issue involves constitutional protections regarding the state’s use of surveillance cameras. The chapter then turns to the Supreme Court case Scott v. Harris to raise concerns about the use of video evidence as not just proof but “truth.” These are of course just a sampling of the issues that the topic of video evidence could raise. The hope is that this chapter will spur further inquiry on the part of the reader.

scholarly journals The Pre-History of the English Laws Act 1858: Mcliver v Macky (1856)

2010 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 361 ◽  
Author(s):  
David V Williams
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
British Empire ◽  
Court Case ◽  
General Application ◽  
South Wales ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Case ◽  
History Of ◽  
English Law

The English Laws Act 1858 declared the reception date for the arrival of English law and statutes of general application in New Zealand to be 14 January 1840. This Act was passed because the New Zealand Supreme Court had decided the Wills Act 1837 (UK) did not apply in New Zealand. New Zealand was annexed to the British Empire as a dependency of New South Wales with a reception date in 1825 or 1828. The Supreme Court case that so decided was McLiver v Macky (1856). The New Zealand Law Foundation's 'Lost Cases Project' ascertained that this judgment was fully reported in an Auckland newspaper – The Southern Cross. This article examines the facts of the case and the reasoning of Acting Chief Justice Stephen as to the basis for British sovereignty in New Zealand and the application of English law to British subjects here.

Integration Now

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
William P. Hustwit
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Historical Analysis ◽  
Court Case ◽  
Board Of Education ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Holmes County ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Case ◽  
History Of

Recovering the history of an often-ignored landmark Supreme Court case, William P. Hustwit assesses the significant role that Alexander v. Holmes (1969) played in integrating the South’s public schools. Although Brown v. Board of Education has rightly received the lion’s share of historical analysis, its ambiguous language for implementation led to more than a decade of delays and resistance by local and state governments. Alexander v. Holmes required “integration now,” and less than a year later, thousands of children were attending integrated schools. Hustwit traces the progression of the Alexander case to show how grassroots activists in Mississippi operated hand in glove with lawyers and judges involved in the litigation. By combining a narrative of the larger legal battle surrounding the case and the story of the local activists who pressed for change, Hustwit offers an innovative, well-researched account of a definitive legal decision that reaches from the cotton fields of Holmes County to the chambers of the Supreme Court in Washington.

scholarly journals A Tale of Seven Cases – Faculty Unions in the United States – From Yeshiva To Elon: Is It Time to Review Yeshiva and the Positions of Church-Sponsored Colleges and Universities As Well?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard J. Hunter ◽  
Hector R. Lozada ◽  
John H. Shannon
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Labor Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Colleges And Universities ◽  
Court Case ◽  
National Labor Relations Board ◽  
Faculty Unions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Case ◽  
Yeshiva University

This article is a summary discussion of the main issues faced by faculty at private, often church-sponsored, universities who sought to be represented by a union in collective bargaining with their employers. The discussion begins by tracing the origins of the rule that faculty at private universities are managers and not employees under the aegis of the National Relations Act in the Supreme Court case of Yeshiva University. The summary then follows developments over the years up to the most recent decision of the National Labor Relations Board that sanctioned the efforts of adjunct professors at Elon University to seek union representation. In examining these two book-end cases, the article discusses issues relating to the effect of the religion clauses of the First Amendment in the context of the National Labor Relations Board’s shifting views on the topic. Last, the authors discuss unionization in the context of church-sponsored colleges and universities. Is it now time for the Supreme Court to review its seminal decision in Yeshiva University and for church-sponsored colleges and universities to rethink their positions as well?

Tom DeLay’s Redistricting

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucas A. Powe
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Court Case ◽  
Legal Challenge ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Case ◽  
2004 Election ◽  
Legal Battle

This chapter examines the Supreme Court case stemming from the issue of redistricting in Texas. After the 2002 election, Texas's congressional delegation consisted of seventeen Democrats and fifteen Republicans. After the 2004 election, the delegation was eleven Democrats and twenty-one Republicans. This change was the result of the 2003 redistricting effort demanded and orchestrated by United States House majority leader Tom DeLay. It completed the process of making Texas a Republican state. In 2003, Representative Joe Crabb of the House Redistricting Committee introduced a redistricting bill that would spark a legal battle between Republicans and Democrats in Texas. The chapter discusses the Democrats' legal challenge to this bill over the issue of gerrymandering as well as the winners and losers from the litigation.

I’m Sweet on You

2018 ◽  
pp. 280-322
Author(s):  
E. Patrick Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Black Women ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Court Case ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Southern States ◽  
Legal Limits ◽  
Romantic Attachments ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Case

This chapter probes the narrators’ deep and enduring emotional and romantic attachments to other women, primarily by focusing on stories of dating and marriage. Johnson’s interlocutors recall: stories of how they met their partners, memories of particular dates, their family’s responses to their relationships, and, for some of them, how and when they decided to pursue marriage. Importantly, Johnson notes that all of these interviews took place before the Supreme Court case that legalized same-sex marriage across the nation in 2015. Despite the legal limits of partnership in Southern states, several of these women chose to remain in the region. Their choices reflect the need to think expansively about the possibilities for queer life for Black women in the South.

Voter-ID Issues in Politics and Political Science

2009 ◽  
Vol 42 (01) ◽  
pp. 81-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Sobel
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Annual Meeting ◽  
Court Case ◽  
Marion County ◽  
Fundamental Significance ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Case ◽  
Politics And Political Science ◽  
Voter Id

The simple act of voting—and its barriers, costs, benefits, and mobilization—continues to be central to politics and political science (Kelley and Mirer 1974). The Supreme Court caseCrawford vs. Marion County Election Board(2008) and a well-attended panel on the topic at the 2008 APSA annual meeting in Boston highlight the pertinence of voter-ID issues to the polity and discipline for the 2008 and future elections. As simple as voting is, it is also “of the most fundamental significance under our constitutional structure” (Burdick v. Takushi1992).

Purchasable Offices in Ceded Territory

1909 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-136
Author(s):  
Percy Bordwell
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Private Property ◽  
The United States ◽  
Court Case ◽  
Law Of Nations ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Case ◽  
Secretary Of War ◽  
Considerable Detail

In the July number of the Journal is given the decision of the Court of Claims in Sanches v. The United States and of the Supreme Court in O’Reilly v. Brooke. Both cases involve the validity of the orders of military governors in former Spanish territory abolishing offices for which a price had been paid and which the holder claimed were private property and thus under the protection of the law of nations and the treaty of peace with Spain. In the Sanches case the office abolished was that of “ numbered procurador of the courts of first instance of the capital of Porto Rico;” in the O’Reilly case the office was that of high sheriff of Havana. In each case the opinion was expressed that the office had ceased with the extinction of Spanish sovereignty, but in the Supreme Court case this was not necessary to the decision, as General Brooke’s liability had already been denied on other grounds, while the opinion on this point was delivered without argument of counsel, without exposition, and without the citation of authority other than that of the Secretary of War in approving General Brooke’s order. It is the opinion of the writer that the holders of those offices were entitled to indemnification. The facts of the O’Reilly controversy will be gone into in considerable detail.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document