What Supreme Court cases have been most divisive or influential in the 20th century?

What Supreme Court cases have been most divisive or influential in the 20th century?

Newly appointed Judge Sotomayor will be lending opinions on these most interesting 5 pending cases up for debate—and official decision. Briefs on case details can be found here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20091005/us_time/08599192776000;_ylt=An3UtFjKgaERFeWFisjIqzd0fNdF

Here are MY views on these cases:

Salazar v. Buono: Congress LEGALLY SOLD land parcel the cross stands on to the VFW—allowing the Cross Monument safe to stand where it is. Buddhists should drop arguments otherwise, reapply for permission to construct their temple on ANOTHER site on said National Park property. IF said permission is DENIED—THEN the Buddhists have discrimination contentions.

Maryland v. Shatzer: A “bright-line” ploy, acted upon by a criminal who THINKS he’s clever—but is far from anything bright; Shatzer REALLY wants to lose this one—otherwise, he AND his attorney face FELONY charges of LYING to police during initial questioning. Shatzer’s attorney best prepare to remove all ties to Shatzer—and begin defending BOTH his freedom AND his bar pratice license. To any end: Shatzer stands to win a small battle—but overall LOSE a greater war.

Sullivan/Gilbert v. Florida: Sullivan and Gilbert both have made it resonately clear they WILL IF GIVEN THEIR FREEDOM, harm—and this time perhaps—KILL innocent people of law abident society DESPITE their ages (as minors at the time) when they committed their henious crimes. The Law should DENY them such chances to go out and again commit such crimes.

NRA & McDonald v. Chicago: It must be noted that criminal society will NEVER honor weapons bans on ANY level, be that local/state and Federal. People—with NO prior criminal histories—should be allowed firearm protection against others seeking to KILL them.

American Needle v. NFL: More detail as to WHY the NFL denied leaguewide logo licencing rights to American Needle needs to be brought out before a decision can be reached. Otherwise, the NFL IS the overall governing entity of ALL it’s 32 teams—legally reserving rights to grant such licensing rights to any sports clothing manufacturer it wishes.

Post Author: mark

2 thoughts on “What Supreme Court cases have been most divisive or influential in the 20th century?

    A. E. Moreira

    (January 24, 2010 - 12:09 pm)

    Roe v. Wade/Doe v. Bolton – 1973—legalized abortion nationwide
    Webster v. Reproductive Health Services – 1989—allowed a state to prohibit use of taxpayer money to fund abortions
    Wickard v. Filburn – 1942—many say that this essentially blew up the Commerce Clause
    References :

    Mr. Wizard

    (January 24, 2010 - 12:15 pm)

    Newly appointed Judge Sotomayor will be lending opinions on these most interesting 5 pending cases up for debate—and official decision. Briefs on case details can be found here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20091005/us_time/08599192776000;_ylt=An3UtFjKgaERFeWFisjIqzd0fNdF

    Here are MY views on these cases:

    Salazar v. Buono: Congress LEGALLY SOLD land parcel the cross stands on to the VFW—allowing the Cross Monument safe to stand where it is. Buddhists should drop arguments otherwise, reapply for permission to construct their temple on ANOTHER site on said National Park property. IF said permission is DENIED—THEN the Buddhists have discrimination contentions.

    Maryland v. Shatzer: A “bright-line” ploy, acted upon by a criminal who THINKS he’s clever—but is far from anything bright; Shatzer REALLY wants to lose this one—otherwise, he AND his attorney face FELONY charges of LYING to police during initial questioning. Shatzer’s attorney best prepare to remove all ties to Shatzer—and begin defending BOTH his freedom AND his bar pratice license. To any end: Shatzer stands to win a small battle—but overall LOSE a greater war.

    Sullivan/Gilbert v. Florida: Sullivan and Gilbert both have made it resonately clear they WILL IF GIVEN THEIR FREEDOM, harm—and this time perhaps—KILL innocent people of law abident society DESPITE their ages (as minors at the time) when they committed their henious crimes. The Law should DENY them such chances to go out and again commit such crimes.

    NRA & McDonald v. Chicago: It must be noted that criminal society will NEVER honor weapons bans on ANY level, be that local/state and Federal. People—with NO prior criminal histories—should be allowed firearm protection against others seeking to KILL them.

    American Needle v. NFL: More detail as to WHY the NFL denied leaguewide logo licencing rights to American Needle needs to be brought out before a decision can be reached. Otherwise, the NFL IS the overall governing entity of ALL it’s 32 teams—legally reserving rights to grant such licensing rights to any sports clothing manufacturer it wishes.
    References :

Leave a Reply