Blog #4

- Explain the holding and majority opinion (and notable dissent)

- Explain what judicial philosophy is reflected

Marbury v. Madison (1803):

• First case in Supreme Court history that implemented judicial review (The right of federal courts to declare laws of Congress and acts of the executive branch void if they are judged to be in conflict with the Constitution). It has played a key role in making the Supreme Court a separate branch of power. Because the "supreme law of the land," in Article VI, is the Constitution, something must check and balance the laws and make sure they are in accordance of it. In conclusion, Marshall Court denied Marbury's commission.
• The judicial philosophy of judicial restraint is mirrored in this case because the judges adhered and stuck closely to the interpretation of the Constitution. Their actions were limited and had no wiggle room.
• I personally agree with the decision the court came to. I think it depends on the case, where it can be ruled solely based the Constitution, or having the ability to tweak it a bit, but it comes down to own's own personal morals and values.

Roe v. Wade (1973):

• This case ruled a state law unconstitutional for banning abortions (saved the life of the mother). A woman under the alias "Jane Roe" petitioned for an abortion. The court ruled under the 14th amendment, illustrating any women's "zone of privacy" and the right to the privacy of their bodies to be a fair enough reason and explanation for a woman's decision. The case won with a 7-2 vote, with the belief that it was the states' responsibility to protect the potential lives coming into this world.
• The judicial philosophy is an example of judicial activism because the court overruled the precedent idea of abortion being illegal.
• I definitely agree with the outcome of this case because i believe that everyone is entitled to their own decisions whether people disagree with it or not. Everyone's instinct is to act for the good and better of their own, and for their family's lives and I strongly believe no one should get in the way of it.

          
Brown v. Board, 1st (1954): 

• This court case overruled the previous Plessy vs. Ferguson decision, "separate but equal." It was recognized that the schools and education for African Americans were inherently unequal, and thus unconstitutional. The racial segregation of children in public schools violated the Equal Protection Clause and 14th Amendment. This case was essential for the upcoming Civil Rights Movement.
• The judicial philosophy shown here is an example of judicial activism because the judges loosely accommodated the Constitution and contributed their own beliefs with what they knew was right into the court decision.
• Personally, I agree with this decision. I think the judges and (some) people in the court room understood how unfair the precedent of "separate but equal" truly was and finally acted upon it with this ruling.