Supreme Court

Nature’s Judicial Process in the Supreme Court consists of decision-making; based on the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Although the Supreme Court has the capability to decide all extended cases; it also has the power to ascend under the Constitution, which allows the Supreme Court its jurisdiction in the Judicial Branch of government. The Judicial Process interpret the laws that are established in the Supreme Court; thus, allowing the Court to exercise its power by shifting its system under the Constitutional laws of the United States. Throughout the Supreme Court, many cases have been rejected and are deposed of, but the Supreme Court approves only certain cases. Thus, the Supreme Court reconciles the issue of that specific case, which is then obtained and written by the Chief Justice of the Court as the final conclusion. Cases that are controversial result in great effect in the Supreme Court. For instance, Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka in 1954 was one of the most controversial cases that the Supreme Court had to resolve; it violated the Equal Protection clause of the fourteenth Amendment. The case that violated an individual right was the case of Gideon vs. Wainwright in 1963, which violated the Sixth Amendment in a criminal case for the defendant. The case of Miranda vs. Arizona in 1966 is another controversial case that the Supreme Court had to base its judgment in order to have the individuals rights read to them due to the violation of the Fifth Amendment. Cases that are controversial have set many concerns throughout the judicial process of the Supreme Court; therefore, the progress of the people in the Judicial Branch was recognized to appreciate how far the Court has advanced and how superior in power the court is to institute an environment for its entire American people. Furthermore, the nature of the judicial process of the Supreme Court contains power on controversial cases throughout the conception by stipulating the Supreme Courts discretionary jurisdiction over state and federal courts in addition to its original jurisdiction.
The Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka (1954) violated the rights of African Americans, which segregated blacks from white schools in result of being disjointed but having equal rights. Despite the support of the Amendments, the rights of African Americans in the America; consequently, had no impression since whites treated blacks differently and neglected them as outcasts who had no involvement in the white society. Although the fact of the case was distinctive, the concern about the issue was that the state supported segregation in public schools. During the District Court hearing of the Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka, (1954) it was ruled in favor of the public schools, which the appellant appealed to the United States Supreme Court to resolve the unconstitutional decision that disregarded blacks from segregation. When the case was decided, Justice Warren stated that “the opinion should be short, readable by the lay public, non-rhetorical, unemotional, and above all non-accusatory,” (pg.318) is how justice is served in the Supreme Court to stop an end to segregation in the school system. It seemingly indicates that Warren wants the public to stop using segregation against African Americans, so that the blacks have the equity as whites in the school system. Despite segregation in school, the school system was inadequate and violated the Fourteenth Amendment. At school, the blacks were inferior to whites, which was lawfully acceptable in the school system until the Supreme Court voted segregation unconstitutional. Acceptance of the doctrine “separate but equal,” (pg.323) indicated that public law and the policy under the Warren Court was required to end “racial segregation in public education.” (pg.323) However, the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision changed the course of History in the United States when the rights of African Americans were openly accepted to all Americans who disregarded blacks inequity.
In the case of Gideon vs. Wainwright, (1963) Gideon was charged with breaking and entering, also distinguished as petty larceny in Panama City, Florida. During the trial, Gideon was not appointed an attorney to represent him since he was poor and couldn’t afford one even though he persisted, the judge refused. Nevertheless, Gideon was denied an attorney, ending the case for Gideon to serve five years in prison. Although Gideon served his five years in prison, he stated “I’ll take my case all the way to the Supreme Court,” (167) which was accepted by the Supreme Court to hear Gideon testify his case. When Gideon appealed to the Supreme Court, he was very fortunate to have his case heard since the Supreme Court only accepts to hear certain cases. Without an attorney, Gideon had to act as an attorney himself by representing his case as the counsel to defend himself during the trial However, the Gideon vs. Wainwright (1963) case, Chief Justice Hugo Black claimed, “no one should be deprived of counsel merely because of his poverty,” (169) clearly indicates that a poor individual under the Sixth Amendment under the Constitution is allowed a counsel in a criminal case even if they cannot afford an attorney. Gideon was approved in his case since it violated his rights and other individuals who couldn’t afford an attorney is now appointed by one under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court ruling under the Constitution. The decision-making in Gideon’s case was a unanimous ruling five to four by the justices, which predicted to have an important outcome of the case. The Constitutional law in Gideon’s case is continuously altering in the Courts of the United States; therefore, the occurring event is written in the History books. Gideon’s case in today’s society benefit others who are unlawfully conflicted in a case. Gideon’s case was definitely one of the most controversial and very important cases to be approved by the Supreme Court.
An important case that violated the Fifth and Sixth Amendment in Miranda vs. Arizona, (1966) is an indication for a person to remain silent when read their rights. Not having one’s rights read and being denied your liberty is considered to be encroachments to the Amendment and the Constitution. When Miranda was not told of his right to silence when asked by an officer, sparked the controversial case that convicted him of violating the Constitution even though the rights of Miranda was never read to him. Despite the fact of his rights, Miranda’s case is an issue that the Supreme Court has not faced yet. However, the case is controversial since one’s right is not informed, so in the Warren Court the affirmation of a criminal was to have his rights read despite being a criminal. If the obtainment of any items that are evident will be confiscated illegally since the right has not been addressed, so the evidence is not valid for the officer to obtain. During the time of the case, the decision was thought to cause more than controversy, but allowing criminals to set foot out of prison.