In NFIB v. Sebelius, the United States Supreme Court upheld Obamacare as constitutional exercise of the power of Congress to make law. In a lengthy dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia laid out the case for why the Court got it wrong. Who was right: Roberts or Scalia? Why? Explain.
I think Robert was right in decision on affordable care acts as healthcare is basic necessities for people and a law passed by Congress should only be judicially reviewed if there is violation of constitutional provision . However , Scalia opposition is more based on technical grounds that law mentions state only while judgement mentions exchange by state. Moreover issue over subsidising 87% population has also been opposed. But these are natter to be enquired by executives and not prerogative of judiciary.
In NFIB v. Sebelius, the United States Supreme Court upheld Obamacare as constitutional exercise of the...
Assignment Complete the Critical Legal Thinking Questions Critical Legal Thinking Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States "One need only examine the evidence which we have discussed... to see that Congress may ... prohibit racial discrimination by motels serving travelers, however local their operations may appear." ---Clark, Justice The Heart of Atlanta Motel, located in the state of Georgia, had 216 rooms available to guests. The motel was readily accessible to motorists using U.S. interstate highways 75 and 85 and...
Question 26 (3.5 points) A case that works its way through a state court system can be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court if... a) the President of the United States orders the Supreme Court to issue a writ of certiorari. b) the Congress orders the Supreme Court to issue a writ of certiorari. c) a state supreme court orders the Supreme Court to issue a writ of certiorari. d) there is a question of federal constitutional law involved in...
QUESTION 15 Kiel ener a o mab O a the United States Supreme Court O b federal district courts O c federal courts of appeals. Od state trial courts QUESTION 16 from being sold in the U S. The Calfornia state legislature enacts a law lowing the sale of Russian muade Congress enacts a law prochibiting do O a the national spending power. O b the commercally practicable enterprise dause dolls California's law will most likely be struck down under...
Briefly explain why the U.S. supreme court decision Hoke Vs. United States (decided in 1913) was important to the study of criminal law.?
Based on Justice Breyer's explanation, how does the Supreme Court help insure that they will hear dissenting views from each other? They deliberately ask each other to imagine dissenting opinions They ask for opinions from EVERYONE, even people who are not familiar with the relevant law or case. They rely on dissent from the opposing counsels who argue before the court They require everyone to speak once - and explain their initial views - before anyone is permitted to speak...
In Direct Sales Co. v. United States,[i] discussed in the Lauria case, the conviction of a wholesale drug company for conspiracy to violate the narcotic laws by selling large quantities of drugs to a physician who was supplying addicts was upheld by the Supreme Court. The Lauria court distinguished Direct Sales case from United States v. Falcone,[ii] in which the sellers of large quantities of sugar, yeast, and cans were absolved from participation in a moonshining conspiracy. What do you...
Since the United States Supreme Court ruled in South Dakota v. Wayfair, States may pass legislation which requires business to collect Sales Tax from customers even though no Sales Tax Nexus would otherwise exisit.
Case analysis: Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain 542 U.S. 692 (2004) United States Supreme Court please list four alternative courses of action which would have helped the client not get into the "problem. with evaluation.
What is the most significant role the United States Supreme Court plays in the American legal system and why do you think they are still so important to the United States government?
The Supreme Court recently reinforced this idea with their ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. In this decision, the court overturned historic laws that sought to minimize corporate influence over elected officials by limiting corporate campaign contributions. This ruling is based on the argument that the limitation of corporate campaign contributions constitutes a violation of these "individual's'" constitutional right to free speech. In this forum, do independent research about this controversial decision and its relevance to to current...