For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order Now

For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order Now

For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order Now

Could that history of the pledge still have an impact or influence on cases about the pledge today (such as the newdow case)?

For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order Now

Chapter 11 Common Knowledge and Routine Practice Litigation continues to occur concerning the Pledge Of Allegiance whenever a controversy arises about its customary practice. One such case was NEWDOW, ET AL., v. RIO LINDA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. There were probably experts called in the original trial of NEWDOW, though I have no details (if anyone discovers, please let us know). There are many amicus curiae briefs (for the appeal to the Ninth Circuit) filed by people who probably consider themselves as having some "expertise" on the topic. "Amicus curiae" is translated as "friend of the court" and the briefs are usually not very brief (short) - they are often lengthy. An older case about the Pledge of Allegiance from the U.S. Supreme Court is West Virginia v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943). In that case, does the Supreme Court seem to take judicial notice of common knowledge or routine practice concerning the Pledge and how it is performed in schools? The following questions concern the case of West Virginia v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943). These are too many questions, so please try to answer questions 3, 5 and 8, as those questions are related and you can answer them in one paragraph. The case can be found in a search of the web or at this link: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/319/624.html 1. Could a school be an organization under FRE Rule 406? 2. What was the routine practice in government schools regarding the Pledge of Allegiance in 1943 and before? 3. What other objections are noted by the Court from other organizations including the Parent and Teachers Association, the Boy and Girl Scouts, the Red Cross, and the Federation of Women's Clubs? Are there inconsistencies between the objections and these two old photographs of the gesture? http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/cph.3a30945 (Links to an external site.) https://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/fsa.8d35173/) (if these links are bad or you would like to see additional similar photos, then please go to https://www.loc.gov/ (Links to an external site.) and type in something like "schoolchildren pledging allegiance to the flag" or "Pledge of Allegiance." 4. Discuss how the Court seems to rely on expert witnesses when the Court references (footnote 3) the National Headquarters of the United States Flag Association and the Court references James A. Moss and his book, The Flag of the United States: Its History and Symbolism (1914) at 108. Do you think that the Supreme Court made an error in relying on that information referenced in footnote 3 (was that information accurate)? 5. The quote that the Court references in footnote 3 in West Virginia v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943) at http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/319/624.html (Links to an external site.) uses the word "Nazi" without using the actual name of that organization (what is the etymology of the word "Nazi" or the actual name of that group)? Did Adolf Hitler refer to members of his group or party as "Nazi"? 6. Could that history of the Pledge still have an impact or influence on cases about the Pledge today (such as the Newdow case)? 7. Do most people today have any "common knowledge" about the old gesture to the flag that pre-dated the modern hand-over-the-heart gesture? 8. Can old photographs avoid the hearsay rule and serve as evidence of routine practices in the past, as well as in the present? Consider the photographs mentioned already above. quote the textbook and also separately quote the powerpoint presentation. The following is "obiter dicta" - a Latin phrase in law meaning "by the way" (BTW), that is, a remark in a judgment that is "said in passing," Did you know that YOU can file an amicus brief in any case that is before the US Supreme Court? There are certain people who seem to do it as a hobby and they file a lot of amicus briefs in a lot of cases. If you enjoy hearing about cases rather than reading about them then you will enjoy the website oyez.org. The oyez site has audio recordings of oral arguments before the US Supreme Court. There is no video because, although it is the 21st century, the US Supreme Court does not allow video recording of its oral arguments. In fact it does not allow photographs inside the chambers (although web searches show that some people have snuck in cameras). Audio recording of Newdow's oral argument and more is at https://www.oyez.org/cases/2003/02-1624 (Links to an external site.) No audio appears to be available for the Barnette case, although there is other infor

For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order Now

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order Now