Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 2

#1 Terry indeed broke the law but what the principle did could also constitute as breaking the

fourth amendment. Since the article does not describe the principle having a search warrant he could not technical search her purse. Indeed the principle probably had sufficient evidence to support getting a search warrant. However since he did not take the time to get the search warrant the principle is violating the first amendment. The court probably ruled that the principle could not have searched her purse so that evidence did not exist. #2 Jamess parents probably did not want the school to search James because they saw no reason for him to have drugs. Since testing blood for chemicals is technical searching your blood. The school should not be able to screen any student without a search warrant. However the school still could not allow him to join the team because coach selected team members are not banned in the constitution. I believe that the court ruled that, since the school did not have a search warrant (and no evidence to support one) the school could not search his blood but the school could have a choice of whether or not to accept him onto the team. #3 The first amendment says that you have a right to say and protest against the government and its actions. In John and Marys case they were peacefully protesting the vietnam war. since the first amendment says that you cannot punish a person for protesting peacefully the school was violating the first amendment. I believe the court ruled that any article of clothing that did not hurt others but protested something would be allowed in the school especially if the school did not have a uniform policy #4 Although I would like to see the name changed myself, legally I believe the team does not have to change the name. This is true because I know that another racial case that was highly debated was concerning a highly inflammatory video about Muslims that was posted on youtube about a year ago. Although Many government officials asked him to delete the video no legal action could be taken due to the 1st amendment. Even though there are some laws prohibiting discrimination, none of them can override the first amendment. #5 In some instances warrants are not issued or issued after the fact. This can be allowed in situations where in the time it takes to file a warrant the situation may disappear or move. Also other complications could arise with challenging cases. For example I remember a case about a year ago where a los angeles police officer turned against every one with the weapons and training equal to the police force. In this particular case he may have exclusive access to police records and warrants meaning that he would already know what they were going to search. In this case a warrantless search would be necessary to find the ex-police officer. #6 during the revolutionary war the British used many things to stop the revolution. Almost all of these british tactics were put into the Bill of Rights as things the us could not do. In this paragraph will talk about The second and third amendments in the Bill of Rights. The second amendment was created because of one of the ways the British disabled the Americans. The British would steal the americans guns, gunpowder, and bullets there by removing any firearm they had. Also the third amendment deals with another disabling mechanism the british used. They would make americans take care of a british soldier in their house so no private

information could be exchanged.

Excellent - good thinking - 8