Sample Coursework Assignment on Lawsuits

Lawsuits

Law courts are usually involved in making judgment that resolves disputes between two parties. The law enforcement agency is involved in interrogating suspects before forwarding the case to the judge. Interrogation is “a necessary evil” because it offers the basis of the case even when the suspects do not prefer the practice. Without interrogation, understanding the case facts and proving the guilt may become almost impossible. Although police may end up torturing the suspects to gather information from them, interrogation is essential to test whether the suspect is guilty or innocent of the alleged crime. Compulsion may occur when a suspect is asked certain questions that involved a criminal activity.

The US courts have been involved in numerous cases that their verdicts seemed controversial. Such cases include the following:

US v. Jones

The above case was to test the Fourth Amendment, which restricts unfair search and apprehension without a warrant. The Supreme Court was right to decide that the law enforcement was wrong to install a GPS tracking system on the defendant’s vehicle while the warrant to do so exceeded its time and location. The court realized the need to respect the Fourth Amendment’s provisions of protecting individual’s privacy even in the era of high technology surveillance (Ohm, 2012). Although the cause of disagreement was whether the tracking system constituted a search, the defendant’s privacy was infringed, and the police were found to be trespassing the defendant’s privacy to obtain information. The judgment offered an analysis of how to balance law enforcement intentions with matters of privacy.

Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project

This case involved the prohibition by the USA Patriot Act to offer material support to foreign groups suspected to be involved in the acts of terrorism. The US Supreme Court verdict restricted the Humanitarian Law Project from offering material support to the Kurdistan Workers Party based in Turkey, as well as other groups, which are termed by international bodies as terrorist organizations. According to Saul (2013), the definition of ‘material support’, as indicated in the Patriot Act incorporates both tangible and intangible form of aid that goes to terrorist organizations, or intended to assist militia indirectly. The court was right to restrain the humanitarian group from assisting the alleged terrorist organizations to enhance humanitarian principles, as well as curbing any efforts of legitimizing such groups. Although the Supreme Court frustrated the effort to promote peace in Turkey and Sri Lanka, it could not contradict the work of Congress.

 Florida v. Harris

This case tested the reliability of detection dogs in certifying the reason of a search. The Fourth Amendment was also under contention, as the Supreme Court seemed to ignore the probable cause. The Supreme Court’s verdict was wrong because it makes it useless for traffic police to have sniff dogs on the road to warrant a search. According to Elena Kagan, the judge who supported the trial court’s decision, the demand by the Supreme Court to establish the dog’s dependability report was inconsistent with the “flexible, common-sense standard” that could prove the probable cause (Guberman, 2015, p. 26). Challenging the trial court’s decision was similar to state that a police in patrol cannot hold a criminal who is found in possession of stolen things. The record produced by the trial court indicated that police were right to search the defendant’s car for the drugs. The US courts allow for unwarranted search of vehicles, which is an exception of the Fourth Amendment.

References

Guberman, R. (2015). Point taken: How to write like the world’s best judges. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Ohm, P. (2012, Jan. 23). United States v. Jones is a Near-Optimal Result. Freedom to Tinker. Retrieved on 26 June 2015 from https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/paul/united-states-v-jones-near-optimal-result/

Saul, B. (2013). Research handbook on international law and terrorism. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.