Judicial Activism Essay Example for Free

Judicial Activism Essay It is perhaps unsurprising that the liberal court led by Chief Justice Earl Warren from 1953 to 1969 invalidated federal, state and local laws at almost twice the rate of the Roberts court. But the more conservative court that followed, led by Chief Justice Warren E. Burger from 1969 to 1986, was even more activist, striking down laws in almost 9 percent of its cases, compared with just over 7 percent in the Warren court and just 4 percent in the Roberts court. The court led by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist from 1986 to 2005 was also more activist than the current one, at 6.4 percent. In a new book, â€Å"Terms of Engagement,† Clark M. Neily III of the Institute for Justice, a libertarian group, calculated that the Supreme Court struck down just 103 of the 15,817 laws enacted by Congress in the half-century ending in 2002. â€Å"It is implausible,† he wrote, â€Å"to suppose the federal government hits the constitutional strike zone 99.5 percent of the time.† Mr. Neily urged the Supreme Court to be more active but rejected the phrase â€Å"judicial activism.† After the Supreme Court argument in the case in the spring of 2012, with things looking grim for the fate of his law, Mr. Obama tried to shift the terms of the discussion back to activism. â€Å"I’d just remind conservative commentators,† he said, â€Å"that for years what we’ve heard is the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint — that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law.† Three months after Mr. Obama’s remarks, Chief Justice Roberts broke with his usual conservative allies and voted with the court’s four liberals to uphold the law. In a joint dissent, the four conservatives said the majority was wrong to portray its ruling as â€Å"judicial modesty† when â€Å"it amounts instead to a vast judicial overreaching.† In a recent essay, â€Å"Why We Need More Judicial Activism,† Suzanna Sherry, a law professor at Vanderbilt University, said the Supreme Court had erred more often in sustaining laws than in striking them down. â€Å"Too much of a good thing can be bad,† she wrote, â€Å"and democracy is no exception.† The article’s central claim is based upon political science research showing that the Roberts Court has been more likely to reach â€Å"conservative† decisions than its predecessors. Liptak reports: In its first five years, the Roberts court issued conservative decisions 58 percent of the time. And  in the term ending a year ago, the rate rose to 65 percent, the highest number in any year since at least 1953. The recent shift to the right is modest. And the court’s decisions have hardly been uniformly conservative. The justices have, for instance, limited the use of the death penalty and rejected broad claims of executive power in the government’s efforts to combat terrorism. But scholars who look at overall trends rather than individual decisions say that widely accepted political science data tell an unmistakable story about a notably conservative court. This distinction is important because the data presented by Liptak suggests that the Roberts Court is such a â€Å"conservative minimalist† court. Indeed, it appears to be the most restrained – or least â€Å"activist† (if â€Å"activism† is defined as willingness to overturn federal statutes or prior precedents) – Court since World War II. According to the data presented with the article in this chart, the Warren, Burger and Rehnquist Courts overturned precedents at an average rate of 2.7, 2.8 and 2.4 per term, respectively. The Roberts Court, on the other hand, has only overturned an average of 1.6 precedents per term. The record on striking down laws shows a similar pattern. The Warren, Burger, and Rehnquist Courts struck down an average of 7.9, 12.5, and 8.2 laws per term, whereas the Roberts Court has only invalidated an average of 3 laws per term. Liptak acknowledges this data at the close of his article, but downplays it with his description: â€Å"The Roberts court is finding laws unconstitutional and reversing precedent — two measures of activism — no more often than earlier courts.† So, while the majority of the Roberts Court’s decisions are â€Å"conservative,† the data Liptak summarizes does not appear to have resulted in a more â€Å"conservative† legal regime, as the Roberts Court has done relatively little to change the law (at least thus far) compared to its predecessors. This is important, because it effectively refutes claims that there is anything particularly radical or â€Å"activist† about the Roberts Court, even if one accepts that it is notably â€Å"conservative.† There is no evidence as yet that the Roberts Court is as willing to challenge federal power as the Court was under Burger (National League of Cities v. Usery) or Rehnquist (Lopez, Morrison, Boerne). There are exceptions, such as some of the Court’s Miranda decisions – which have certainly made the law less protective of criminal suspects and defendants – and Citizens United, but these exceptions are balanced by aggressive liberal opinions in areas like executive power and the death penalty. In sum, even if most of the Roberts Court’s decisions are â€Å"conservative† a substantive analysis of the Roberts Court’s decisions does not reveal a significant rightward shift in the law.

Theme of Epiphany in James Joyces Ulysses Essay -- Joyce Ulysses Essa

The Theme of Epiphany in Ulysses  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚      James Joyce's Ulysses is a novel of epic proportions that has been proclaimed the greatest piece of literature of the twentieth century. Ulysses takes place in Dublin, Ireland on June 16, 1904. The book is full of parallels, metaphors, and experimental literary techniques. However, a dominant theme is that of epiphany. Not necessarily religious in meaning, the Joycean idea of epiphany is a sudden discovery of the essential nature or meaning of something. In Ulysses, Joyce describes the pursuits of two main protagonists, Leopold Bloom and Stephen Dedalus, both individuals yearning for something more. As the day progresses the two characters unknowingly cross paths until, as a result of their day, they finally meet. In doing so, they find in each other humanistic ideals, in the form of individual epiphanies, that are needed to complete their yearnings. Joyce uses these epiphanies to represent his theme of the ability of a single day to act as a microcosm of the many facets of human society. Stephen Dedalus is first introduced in a tower in Sandycove that he is renting and sharing with "friend" Buck Mulligan. While going about their morning routines it becomes evident that Stephen is upset, with Mulligan and the situation, and after a conversation filled with mockery and annoyance, Stephen vows not to return to the tower that night. Stephen, now homeless, takes to the street hoping to find solace in the city. Stephen is recently back in Dublin from a self-exile in Paris. He has completed his bachelor degree and is very educated, especially in language and the humanities. However, as he has grown in learning and experience, he is still lacking essential characteristics ... ...shows not just Stephen has grown that day. By showing in full the transpiring of one single day and the effect it has on two distinct yet dynamic character, James Joyce has made Ulysses a book about the success of humanity. It is hard to believe that a novel that has had such a battle with censors due to its "obscenity" can portray society in a moral, positive manner. But in the less than 24 hours of action, almost 800 pages of language, can be found many things. One is the struggle of the family, shown through Stephen (son), Bloom (father), and Molly (mother). More importantly is the power of one day, with its events and epiphanies, and the fact that that day could be any day or every day. Bibliography Joyce, James. Ulysses. Modern Library Edition, 1934. Tindall, William York. A Reader's Guide to James Joyce. Syracuse University Press Edition, 1959

Ap English Certainty vs/ Belief

Certainty Certainty is the belief in yourself that you can empower anything. Doubt is the fear of failure and is what the mass majority are overcome with. Certainty is the inner strength that everyone has, just not many want to express, that is why there are leaders and followers, strong and the weak, living and the dead. With inner strength your capabilities are limitless but when there is doubt, there is nothing. Doubt is one obstacle in a world filled with a plethora of them.Doubts are what control you from succeeding, they hold you back, tie you down , and strangle you from what you want , and just in the final seconds when your pulse lowers, your blood circulation is stopping , and you feel your hand trembling out of the fear, you grasp onto the only thing you have left , certainty. Certainty is your life support, it’s all you have left to live for, you cling onto and your ride through the storm on certainties back. It’s in that moment when you realize your life is ahead of you, and you’re certain of that. Doubt is your glutinous sin, and Satan is its master.You have to break free from its reins all that you’ve ever known and cling to certainty. With certainty you’re either in or you’re out. There is no equilibrium that you can find. Certainty is having 100% faith in something. It is the same as life, if you are certain with your life you are successful and can move mountains; doubt makes you weak and you are succumbed by the mountains. Leaders like this were Aristotle, a philosopher in physics, Benjamin Franklin, the inventor of electricity, and more modern leaders such as FDR, and JFK, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs. They saw the world through eyes of certainty.Certainty gave them the power to discover a new world. They took what others saw as impossible and made it possible. There was never a doubt in their mind that they wouldn’t conquer. Doubt overcomes many in the world today and it really is like an epidemic. Many doubt themselves before they try. This creates the 80% of the world and the 20%. The 80% are those consumed in doubts about their lives, but the 20% will conquer the world if they had the means. Certainty is the only inoculation for doubt. Take a little bit of certainty since there is much to go around and achieve what you never thought possible.

The Shack Discussion Questions

The Shack by William P. Young is a story about Mack, a man whose daughter is kidnapped and brutally murdered. A few years after her murder, Mack receives an invitation from God to meet Him at the shack where they found his daughters bloody clothes. Mack goes and works through the meaning of suffering as he spends the weekend with the Trinity. Spoiler warning: This study guide reveals important details about The Shack by William P. Young. Finish the book before reading on. Were you drawn in by the plot of The Shack?Why do you think Macks encounter with God took place at the shack? If God were to invite you somewhere, where would it be? (In other words, where is the center of your doubt and pain)?Do you think suffering makes people closer to God or causes them to distance themselves from Him? What has been the pattern in your life?Were you satisfied with Gods answers to Mack about suffering? Do you struggle with believing God is good in light of all the tragedy in the world?How is Youngs description of God different from your concept of God? What parts of his description did you like and what parts didnt you like?Did The Shack change any of your opinions about God or Christianity?What were some of the things The Shack teaches about God, faith, and life that you disagreed with?Would you recommend The Shack to a friend?Rate The Shack on a scale of 1 to 5.