Landmark Decisions Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Landmark Decisions - Assignment ExampleThe rulings were important in moldable application of the constitution in practical terms (Plessy v. Ferguson) and also in securing the in good orders of the incriminate person in protecting his or her innocence (Miranda v. Arizona). Introduction In the Plessy v. Ferguson case, Homer Plessy challenged the Louisiana law requiring that vague and sporting people ride in separate coaches on trains. His argument was that the 14th Amendment of the constitution was meant to guarantee touch protection and due process at a lower place the law. However the imperative Court ruled that segregation under state law was constitutional as long as the facilities provided for the different races were tolerable. This separate notwithstanding equal ruling sets the stage for segregation laws that stayed in force for the next 60 years. In the Miranda v. The Arizona irresponsible Court held that an accused persons confession was non to be admitted in court if it was set in motion that he or she was not informed of their right to counsel or having themselves protected against self-incrimination. It forms the basis of the Miranda warnings that be issued up to the present day before any interrogation by an arrested person is initiated (Landmark Rulings of the United States Supreme Court, n.d.). 1. The Plessy v. ... In passing the ruling, Justice Henry Brown noted that the Separate but equal law merely implied a legal distinction between black and white and that it did not violate the Amendment because it could not have been intended to abolish distinctions based on race or to enforce social equality. As far as the majority Justices were concerned, as long as the statute did not discriminate against the black population politically and merely sought to enforce social order then it was legal and constitutional. This very narrow interpretation of the constitution was entirely in line with the thinking at the time and was veritable and endorsed by all except unrivalled of the judges of the Supreme Court (Amar, 2011). In the Miranda v. Arizona ruling, the appellant had objected to the use of a confession that had been made without the accused being made aware of their Fifth Amendment rights (the right to not involuntarily incriminate oneself) and also on this Sixth Amendment right (the right to legal counsel, provided melt of charge if the accused cannot afford it). The Supreme Court ruling was a landmark in the expression accused persons are questioned prior to being charged in court. It also made the reading of the accuseds rights a mandatory requirement. Initially there was fear that this decision would lead to as one of the justices said, the setting free of killers, rapists and other criminals who would then go out and commit crime again but it also emphasized the doctrine of presumption of innocence, a key constitutional right (Schauer, 2013). 1A. In the Plessy v. Ferguson ruling, the lonely(prenominal) dissenting voice was of Associate Justice John Marshall Harlan of Kentucky who held that the constitution is color