Preview

Supreme Court Case: Branzburg V. Hayes

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
165 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Supreme Court Case: Branzburg V. Hayes
Branzburg v. Hayes was the only ever supreme court case to deal with reporter’s privilege. The ruling of this case was that reporter’s had no right to hide their sources in a court case. The chief justice at the time,Warren Burger, made a point that reporters, “like other citizens, [must] respond to relevant questions put to them in the course of a valid grand jury investigation or criminal trial (Fargo,2010).” With a decision that was five for and four against, this case was not an open and shut many thought it to be. Calling into play a look at the first amendment and what it really means when it says the freedom of speech. Interpreting a document that is more than two hundred years old is not an easy task to accomplish, having to combine

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    MILLERSBURG — A Wooster man has denied criminal charges he was in possession of methamphetamine when he was pulled over for a traffic stop in January.…

    • 177 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The case we received was Ed Franklin, a former teacher at public and private schools in Minersville, pled guilty to state criminal charges of sexually molesting several of his former students. One of Franklin's victims was invited to appear at Franklin’s sentencing hearing in order to testify about the impact of the molestation. While the hearing was open to the press and public, the judge ordered the reporters present not to identify any of the sexual assault victims in press accounts of the sentencing. None of the reporters present at the hearing raised any objection to the judge’s order. Despite the order, a reporter for the American Press news syndicate included the victim’s name in coverage of the hearing.…

    • 542 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Mapp vs. ohio: The surrounding of the case was the police came in her house try to find a bomb suspect they found the bomb suspect but they also found pornograph pics of her self so she was arrested that day. The supreme court's decision was that when a police officer is searching you or your house they have to specify what they are looking for. The courts decision maid a big change because the cops if they come in your house looking for a gun but they find a knife they cant arrest you for it because they have to specify what they are looking for.…

    • 107 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    A recent criminal Supreme Court case that I find to be interesting is Missouri v. Frye. Actus reus is a guilty act, mens rea is a guilty mind, and concurrence is the equality of rights. Both actus reus and mens rea are both needed in order for a defendant to prove criminal liability. This case was about a guy named Frye, he was arrested for driving with a revoked license. Frye was previously arrested a few times before this incident dealing with the same crime. Missouri state law can give you a maximum sentence of up to four years when arrested three times for driving on a revoked license. The prosecutor sent Frye's counsel a letter that offered two possible plea bargains. If he was to plea guilty the charge could be reduced to a misdemeanor…

    • 397 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    What is the difference between lawful trickery and unlawful coercion according to the 1990 Supreme Court decision in Illinois v. Perkins?…

    • 293 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Missouri v McNeely

    • 483 Words
    • 2 Pages

    A Missouri police officer stopped Tyler McNeely after observing it exceeding the posted speed limit and repeatedly crossing the center line. The officer noticed McNeely’s bloodshot eyes, his slurred speech, and a smell of alcohol on his breath. McNeely performed poorly on a battery of field sobriety tests, and he declined to take a Breathalyzer test. When McNeely indicated he refuse a breath sample for testing, the officer took him to a nearby hospital for blood alcohol test. The officer explained to McNeely that under Missouri’s implied consent law, refusal to submit voluntarily to the blood test would lead to an immediate one-year suspension of his driver’s license and could be used against him in any future prosecution. The testing of the blood indicated that the blood alcohol level was significantly above the legal limit. McNeely had challenged the blood test evidence claiming that there should have been a search warrant before ordering a blood sample.…

    • 483 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    complaint made by Gregory and in my opinion, though the rules and regulations of the…

    • 1025 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Reasoning: Justice Hughes acknowledges that there are limits to freedom of the press, however, any constitutional restraints can only be imposed in very special and extreme circumstances such as obscenity or the obstruction of the war effort. In this case the Judge ruled that there were no such vital threats at risk. The judge ruled that the most important freedom of the press in the right to operate without prior censorship.…

    • 1889 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Since its creation in the late 18th century, the Supreme Court has made numerous decisions that impacted the course of history. The Supreme Court has a very important job, to interpret the constitution principles and make decisions based on these important standards. Had it not been for the rulings made by this court, many laws and precedents may not have been adapted. One case that had an exceptionally important impact on history was the case of Muller vs. Oregon. This case is one of the most influential decisions in Supreme Court history and its impacts are still seen even today.…

    • 1033 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Most importantly, the 1905 Jacobsen v. Massachusetts was a Supreme Court case whereby the Court upheld the ultimate states’ authority to impose compulsory vaccination laws. It articulated that an individual’s freedom should at times be subjected to the states’ police power and subordinated to the collective public welfare. The Court decision in the case elicited numerous questions regarding the state government’s power to safeguard the public's health, as well as the protection of personal liberty as enshrined in the Constitution. The Court also articulated that the states had the authority to protect its citizens from dangers of diseases for their own good, which necessitated the enforcement of the compulsory vacation laws (NCBI, 2005).…

    • 355 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Supreme Court later ruled that the Sedition Act was a direct violation of the press and people's ability to express them. New York Times v. Sullivan ruled that the press has the right to make any type of statement without fear of repercussion of the government and that if something was defamatory then actions are legally acceptable.…

    • 744 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the Supreme Court case District of Columbia v. Heller, the Court analyzed the meaning and extent of the Second Amendment for the first time since 1939. In narrow 5-4 decision penned by Justice that the District of Columbia’s ban on handgun was unconstitutional and thus violates the individual right granted by the Second Amendment. The Justices of the Supreme Court interpreted the Second Amendment as the right of individuals to keep and bear arms, having nothing to do with collective right grant by the service in a state militia. The Court made clear that this right to bear arms has limits, but, as explored in detailed below, the statue of limitations of those limitation remain unclear. D.C.…

    • 1625 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Wolff V. Mcdonnell

    • 893 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The criminal justice system realizes that inmates do have some rights, however it is also recognized that those inmates do have less rights than free citizens. Taking away some rights of the inmates is a valid punishment and by restricting these rights it helps in maintaining security in prisons. The title of the case that I chose was Wolff v. McDonnell. This case was very important because it uniformed certain rights and freedoms within correctional facilities. “Although inmates received some procedural safe-guards to protect them against the notorious abuses of disciplinary meetings, they did not receive all the due- process rights of a criminal trial” (Clemens, 2002). Nor did the Court question the right of correctional officials to revoke the good time of inmates. In this case, “Robert O. McDonnell, a prisoner, had filed a class- action suit against the state of Nebraska, claiming that its disciplinary procedures, especially those pertaining to the loss of good time were unconstitutional” (Clemens, 2002). McDonnell also complained, along with other inmates, about the limitations on their access to the law library, legal services, and visitation with the inmate legal assistant and that the regulations regarding prisoners ' mail violated the attorney-client privilege” (Keenan, 2005). This case was argued on Argued April 22, 1974 and a decision was made on decided June 26, 1974.…

    • 893 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Hollingsworth V. Perry

    • 1258 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Marissa Bair Mr. Turcotte AP US History 6 December 2012 Hollingsworth v. Perry 1. In February of 2004 the mayor of San Francisco, Gavin Newsom and other city officials began distributing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples in the city of San Francisco, California. In March of the same year, the County of San Francisco ordered the halt of marriages, pending court review. On March 29th, the San Francisco Superior Court declared San Francisco’s issuing of same-sex marriage licenses illegal. Multiple state Supreme Court hearings were held on the legality of the same-sex marriages in the spring of 2004. San Francisco filed its own lawsuit against the state of California in order to have its case heard. In August, the state Supreme Court ruled the same-sex marriages performed in San Francisco violated authority and state law. The court deemed all same-sex marriages performed to be null. The next year, in March of 2005, Richard Kramer, the trial judge of In re Marriage Cases (2008) reported that California’s ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. They said marriage was a fundamental right that cannot be discriminated against based on sexual orientation. The next month, California legalized same-sex marriage on June 16th, 2008. Less than five months later, the marriages were stopped by the passing of Proposition 8, which provided that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid in recognized in California.” This overturned the California Supreme Court’s ruling of In re Marriage Case that same-sex couples have the constitutional right to marry. Same-sex marriages in California…

    • 1258 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Supreme Court was presented with the case of Fischer vs. The University of Texas where Abigail Fisher was suing the University for discrimination in their affirmative action based admissions process. The Supreme Court voted 7-1 and ruled to send the case back to the lower courts for further review and put off making any final decisions to change the U.S. policy on affirmative action, a “longstanding but fragile societal compromise, one that forbids quotas but allows using race as one factor among many in the admissions process” (Laptik). Both articles discussed in length the constitutionality of the race-based admissions process as well as explaining the Supreme Court’s position on the matter. The justices made statements that explained that the admissions programs must be subject to strict scrutiny where the it can be determined that classification based on gender, race and ethnicity occurs for the sole purpose of creating a diverse student population. The programs that use affirmative action in public universities are being scrutinized to ensure that their methods are a means to an end and serve to create diversity only. This issue will come before the Supreme Court again in the future and there will most likely be a more permanent ruling on the matter.…

    • 580 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays