Landmark Decisions - Essay Example

Landmark Decisions Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896) In this case, Plessy is the petitioner who lived in Louisiana, United s. The case is concentrated over the subject of right, immunity, privilege as well as security to the citizen of the United States. In this case, Plessy belongs from the colored race who boarded the rail car, which was, however, assigned for a white color person. As per the constitution of Federal Government, people belonging to different races do not have compartments in same rail cars. As per the constitution, Plessy had thus violated the rules. However, as per Plessy, the rail way authority was the guilty of violating the rule as against racial discrimination. In this regards, Plessy has also filed the petition against John H. Ferguson, the director of the rail company of United States (Street Law, Inc., 2000). By reviewing the case scenario, it has been observed that the Plessy v. Ferguson case was concentrated on the violation of law related to racial discrimination. The case was in favor of John Howard Ferguson, who was the legal authority of the case for Louisianan Railroad Companies, as a defendant of the case. In accordance, the decision was announced by the supreme court of Louisiana stating that Plessey was legitimized as per the Unites State laws, which was established for creating segregation as per racial basis. In this case, the legislation was recognized as major influence behind the decision making process of Supreme Court of Unites States (Street Law, Inc., 2000). Besides, Supreme Court’s decision in the year of 1875 has restricted the federal government’s ability towards making any kind of intervention in the state government affair. In order to make any kind of involvement in the racial segregation as well as discrimination related act, the federal government needs to take the permission from the Congress in power (Street Law, Inc., 2000). Contradictorily, in favor of the plaintiff, Plessy’s lawyer provided evidence, which suggested that the violation of rules under thirteenth and fourteenth amendments had taken place by the railway company. According to the plaintiff, the state railway company was accused of making differences between the boarding of rail car for whites as well as for colored race during providing services. As per the fourteenth amendment rules, Plessy was provided with the ticket of accessing common compartments, which indeed makes him liable for equal treatment in the rail besides the fact that the rule to ensure separate facilities on the basis of consumers’ race was in itself ethically objectionable. With a similar notion, the court also supported John Howard Ferguson denoting that the inequality of facilities delivered to the so called ‘Whites’ and the ‘Blacks’, which indicate towards the violation of the rules mentioned in the thirteen amendment (National Humanities Center, n.d.). As per the political scenario, in the year of 1875, the US Government was witnessed to lead several attacks over the racial discrimination held in the nation. During that particular era of reconstruction, the political rights of colored Americans were affirmed by three constitutional amendments, following which, a large number of laws was passed by congress. As per the political scenario, no colored person was allowed to take seats in the coach, which was assigned to the white person, which led to a trend of discrimination wherein the two races had to travel separately. The case depicts about the fact that racial discrimination was practiced within the US and that too, with the support of law on many instances. As per the then political scenario, laws were also binding to those instances where colored people or ‘Blacks’ were not allowed to appoint ‘Whites’ as their maid or in a position junior to theirs. Such variations were also prominent in many other parts of the then US society (Street Law, Inc., 2000). This indicates that political perceptions and behaviors impose strong influences on constitutional laws. However, the effectiveness of this notion in the current scenario is subjected to further research on the matter. During the respective case, both the parties had presented valid arguments in their supports. In order to support Plessy, the lawyer presented a few arguments those were helpful in generating a valid support to Plessy’s work. As per the point of view of the lawyer, Plessy did not make any offence by boarding this railcar as that railcar was a public transport property, delivering equal rights to the nationals in the US, irrespective of their racial background. According to the case law 163 U.S. 537, Plessy has presented arguments wherein the facts revealed that the railway company had practiced racial discrimination by segregating the compartments on the basis of ethnicity, which was actually a violation of the 14th amendments made by the railway company (Brown, 2012). It has been observed that during the case of Plessy vs. Ferguson, the federal political scenario was different from what is observed currently. In the then scenario, the political climate of the US was experiencing amendments in its legal provisions relating to racial conflicts within the country. It was correspondingly identified that during the case, the Supreme Court had also exhibited a degree of racial biasness. It is also ascertained that people belonging to the colored race are the victims of racial conflicts. It is notable that the Supreme Court of United States was paid more attention towards the white race people rather than colored race people (National Humanities Center, n.d.). The case was held in the scenario of 1875, when the society was experiencing a transformation in the overall legal point of view of the society. In this case, the supreme court of Louisiana decided to support the railway company, which could indulge the fundamental rights of colored people living in the US. 1875 in the US has experienced a large number of conflicts along with riots, which took place due to excessive racial conflicts. Correspondingly, it can be depicted that the societal structure of the then Louisiana has been highly depended on racial biasness, which influenced the decisions of court in this particular case. When emphasizing the philosophical understanding of decisions taken in the case it indicates towards the previous political structure as well as conflicts, which had taken place during the period of 1873 - 1874. Previously, in the year of 1873, the event of Colfax massacre took place, which made a huge impact over the philosophy of people concerning racial discrimination and might also have influenced the decision of the court (Brown, 2012). Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) As per the case scenario, in the backdrop of Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), Miranda was accused for armed robbery as well as kidnapping and raping of 17 years old girl. He was convicted on the basis of suspect. However, the police department failed to inform Miranda about his fundamental rights related with the case, which gave rise to a legitimate conflict between the Arizona police department and Miranda (Arizona Geographical Alliance, n.d.). Miranda vs. Arizona is a case of criminal offence, charged against Ernesto Miranda, however, it also exhibits a scenario wherein the rights of the convict were infringed for not being informed about his fundamental rights. One of the factors that influenced the decision of the court in this case was the fact that Miranda was already having a history of criminal offence committed in his early teenage year. For his previously committed criminal offence, Miranda was also sentenced for one year in reform school. Latter, he was arrested by the Phoenix police department on the suspicion of committing armed robbery, kidnapping and rape, depending upon circumstantial evidence such as the eyewitnesses as well as Miranda’s previous criminal records (United States Courts, n.d.). It has been pragmatic that every case has a few dissenting opinions, which often influences the final decision of the court. As already noted in this context, the Miranda vs. Arizona case is a prime example of criminal conviction, which mainly focuses upon the criminal offense relating to armed robbery, kidnapping as well as rape of a 17 years old young girl. The principle dissenting opinion presented in this particular case indicated towards the misinterpretation of convict’s rights. According to this case, Miranda was unaware about his rights, which he was supposed to be used during his conviction in Arizona. As per this context, Miranda had the right to remain silent as well as he could also have a lawyer during the interrogation, but as none of these conditions were sufficed, the legitimacy of the case produced by the police department was subjected to ethical soundness (United States Courts, n.d.). As per the political ideology of the US, the federal government has imposed few rules and regulations in support of the convict on the basis of suspect. According to the law of Supreme Court, the Fifth Amendment as well as Sixth Amendment both provides statements relating to the rights of convict. According to the law of court, the person who has been convicted and is in the police custody should be knowledgeable regarding about his rights by the officials. Prior to interrogation, the person should clearly be informed that he could remain silent as well as anything he could say could be used in court and against him. Moreover, the convicted person must be delivered with the rights to consult with his lawyer as well as during the interrogation, the person should have the rights to keep his lawyer with him. On the other hand, if the person is not having the wealth capacity of appointing a lawyer, the authority should appoint a lawyer for the convicted person who will represent him during the case (Arizona Geographical Alliance, n.d.). The case scenario will represent a huge transformative decision that has been taken by the supreme court of America when providing judgment provided in the case of Miranda. According to the rule of the Fifth as well as the Sixth amendments, the police department should make the convict aware about his or her rights during the custody. However, it has been observed that the Supreme Court also did accuse the officials in conducting their duty over the job responsibility of the police department. In this regard, the court has stated that the coercive nature of police during the custody of Miranda had a strong influence over the decision making process of the Supreme Court (Arizona Geographical Alliance, n.d.). Political scenario of the US has been considered as a vital influence when making decision regarding any criminal offence committed by any individual. It has been observed that people were living in Arizona suffering from numerous criminal activities taken place within the society. In this context, it has been become obvious that police department can convicted any people by taking into the account of suspects. More specifically, it can be stated that the political scenario of the case depicted about the brutality of police departments in order to control the crime. In this regard, the Supreme Court of America has introduced few rules as well as regulations in support of suspected persons. This law is also recognized to be an evidence of history that influenced fundamental rights of convicted people to protect them from any kind of police brutality as well as other banned forms of cruelty (United States Courts, n.d.). As per the legal constitution in the US, philosophical underpinnings are recognized as one of those important factors, which influences the judgment of court significantly. As per the case scenario of Miranda vs. Arizona is concerned, the US has placed few comments regarding the offense suspected to have been committed by Miranda, who was accused for the guilt of armed forced robbery, kidnapping as well as rape of a 17 years old girl. The social scenario of Arizona is experiencing several disputes arising with a large number of criminal offences within the society. The US society has thus experienced numerous criminal activities, which caused too social instabilities. During 1966, the increasing rate of police brutality had become a major concern for the Supreme Court of Arizona. The cruel treatment by the police department in order to control criminal offences has raised distress as well as anger of the common people against the government and over the police department. Based on the above issues, the Supreme Court has amended few laws that can help to secure the fundamental rights of convicted person (The Bill of Rights Institute, 2013). How Did The Courts In Each Era Read The U.S. Constitution Differently? Plessy vs. Ferguson The case of Plessy vs. Ferguson took place during the period of post civil war. The scenario was in the southern areas of the country, White men were also not ready to give the fundamental rights of the colored people. It has been also stated that white men were still suffering from slavery under the tight control of white men. It has been observed that few courts have prohibited black people for being a witness in the Supreme Court. It has also been observed that black people had violated any rule of labor contract can be eligible for the punishment (Street Law, Inc., 2000). Miranda vs. Arizona During the year of 1966, the government of America has been virtually kind towards every person. As per the constitutional act presented by the US, it is observable to have been made a few amendments in the criminal law under the Fifth as well as Sixth constitutional acts. It has been also stated that the people living in the US had minimum rights to protect their self. Correspondingly, the law was introduced by considering the fundamental rights of individuals in the society. It has also been observed that this law will encourage human rights and protect the dignity of people in a more uniform and unbiased manner (Kanas. Org., 2015). References Arizona Geographical Alliance. (n.d.). You Have the Right to Remain Silent: Miranda v. Arizona (1966). Primary Sources, 1-22. Brown, J. (2012). Plessy vs. Ferguson. Supreme Court of the United States, 1-14. Equal Rights Trust. (n.d.). Plessy v. Ferguson 163 U.S. 537 (1896). Retrieved from http://www.equalrightstrust.org/ertdocumentbank/Microsoft%20Word%20-%20Plessy%20v%20Ferguson%20edited.pdf Kanas. Org. (2015). Miranda vs. Arizona. Retrieved from http://www.accesskansas.org/kbi/PDF/court/RCD19660613.pdf National Humanities Center. (n.d.). Plessy vs. Ferguson. United States Supreme Court, 1-4. Street Law, Inc. (2000). Plessy vs. Ferguson (1896). Supreme Court Historical Society,1-29. The Bill of Rights Institute. (2013). Miranda vs. Arizona (1966). Rights of the Accused, 109-118. United States Courts. (n.d.). Fifth Amendment: Miranda v. Arizona and criminal defence. Educational Resources, 1-12. Read More