The Supreme Court on ‘Hazelwood’ Essay Example for Free

The Supreme Court on ‘Hazelwood’ Essay Both judges and school officials have been thinking about and dealing with the nature of students’ rights to free speech through the 1970s and 1980s, since Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School Dist., the 1969 landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that acknowledged student rights. Stating that students do not â€Å"shed their constitutional rights . . . at the schoolhouse gate† (393 U.S. at 506), the Court upheld the right of three Des Moines high school students to wear black armbands as a peaceful symbol of opposition to the Vietnam war. . . . The Court’s ruling and reasoning subsequently were applied to student expression other than the wearing of armbands, from theater productions to art shows, from school assemblies to student publications. . . . The Supreme Court, balancing students’ constitutional freedoms and administrators’ traditional responsibilities, said in Tinker that school officials could not stop expression simply because they disliked it. . . . Student journalists’ efforts to gain press freedom experienced a major setback on January 13, 1988, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Hazelwood School Dist. v. Kuhlmeier that school administrators could censor a school-sponsored newspaper. Just as Tinker had started an era of expanded student rights, so Hazelwood signals a departure that could lead toward more restriction of students’ expression. The Hazelwood principal believed that the stories he censored—accounts of unnamed, pregnant students and a report on the impact of parental divorce on students—were unfair and inappropriate for teenagers. He was concerned that the â€Å"anonymous† students could be identified, that the school would appear to be condoning teenage pregnancy, and that divorced parents criticized should be consulted prior to publication. . . . Instead of ruling narrowly on student newspapers, the Court in Hazelwood gave discretion to school officials to: 1. Serve as publisher. . . . 2. Censor, if there is a â€Å"reasonable† educational justification, any expression that does not properly reflect the school’s educational mission. The Court called it reasonable to censor a newspaper story that school officials believe is not â€Å"fair,† expression that deals with â€Å"sensitive topics,† and content that is â€Å"ungrammatical, poorly written, inadequately researched, biased or prejudiced, vulgar or profane, or unsuitable for immature audiences.† 3. Use this power to control expression through any school-sponsored activity. Legal distinctions between class-produced and extra-curricular publications disappeared. Theater production, art shows, debates, and pep rallies are just some of the schoolsponsored activities now under tighter control. . . . 4. Review student expression in advance, even when no guidelines define what will or will not be censored. Constitution of the United States, Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Analgesics :: essays research papers

Analgesics "An aspirin a day keeps the doctor away." Although this saying can be true, it is not only aspirin that can cure the pains of life, but also several other types of analgesics. There are a wide variety of analgesics. More commonly known as painkillers. The narcotic analgesics act on the central nervous system and change the user's perception; they are more often used for severe pain and can make the user develop an addiction. The nonnarcotic analgesics, known as over the counter or OTC, work at the site of the pain. These do not create tolerance or dependence and do not vary the user's perception. OTC's are more commonly used everyday to treat mild pain. Many people wish to treat familiar pains themselves, such as toothache or headache pain. To treat these types of symptoms, OTC's are used. There are three main types of OTC drugs. They are as follows: Â ·Aspirin (salicylic acid acetate) is an anti-inflammatory (decreases swelling and inflammation), anti-pyretic (fever reducing), and anti-platelet (decreases platelets in the body to thin blood). Many heart treatment patients take an aspirin a day to prevent blood clotting. However, if aspirin is taken in large quantities over long periods of time, it may cause gastric ulcers or other internal damage. The molecular formula of aspirin is C9H8O4. Some examples of Aspirin are Bayer, Ecotrin, and Aspergum. Â ·Ibuprofen (propionic acid) is an anti-inflammatory and anti-pyretic. It is often used to treat arthritis, dental pain, menstrual pain, headache, migraine, and back pain. Ibuprofen works by reducing the levels of prostaglandis (substances that cause pain) in the body. This drug is gentler on the stomach than aspirin. The molecular formula of ibuprofen is C13H18O2. Some examples of ibuprofen are Motrin, Advil, and Nuprin. Â ·Acetaminophen (Paracetamol) is an alternative to aspirin. It is also an anti-inflammatory, anti-pyretic, and anti-platelet. Acetaminophen is much less likely to cause intestinal side affects than aspirin, however overdose of this drug can cause serious liver poisoning. The molecular formula for acetaminophen is C8H9NO2. Some examples of Acetaminophen are Tylenol, Midol, and Panadol. Each of these OTC analgesics has different side affects and purposes, but they all share three common elements. These elements are Carbon (atomic number 6, atomic mass 12.011), Hydrogen (atomic number 1, atomic mass 1.0079) and Oxygen (atomic number 8, atomic mass 15.999). By looking at the molecular formulas of each type of OTC analgesic, these three common elements form the base for each chemical compound.

The Gospel of Luke

The Gospel of Luke like the other three Gospels depicts the life, teachings, death and the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. This is the largest of the four Gospels. The Gospel opens with a salutation to Theophilus and proceeds to tell the story of the appearance of Angel Gabriel to Zachariah, whose wife Elizabeth did not have the ability to bear a child. The Angel announces to Zachariah that his wife will bear a child and that â€Å"he will bring back many people of Israel to the Lord their God. He will go as God’s messenger, strong and mighty like the prophet Elijah. He will bring fathers and children again; he will turn the disobedient people back to the way of thinking of the righteous; he will get the Lord’s people ready for him†. The dumb founded Zachariah could not believe the words of the Angel Gabriel. Zachariah was spending a long time in the Temple and when he came out he could not speak. He was punished with the dumbness till the miracle was realized by him. People knew that he had seen a vision in the Temple since he was making signs to them with his hands and unable to say a word. Gabriel then appears before Mary, who was promised in marriage to Joseph and proclaims that the Holy Spirit will come on her and she will give birth to a son who is to be named Jesus. He adds that â€Å"He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High God† and that the Lord God will make him a king, as his ancestor David was, and he will be the king of the descendants of Jacob for ever and his kingdom will never end†. After a few months Mary visited her cousin Elizabeth, and when Mary greeted her, the baby in Elizabeth’s womb â€Å"jumped with gladness†. In due course Elizabeth gave birth to a baby boy and he was circumcised and named John. Zachariah regained his speech at that time, as he was filled with the Holly Spirit. The baby grew up into John the Baptist. Joseph and Mary went to Becklehem to register their names for the census and ordered by Emperor Augustus. There Mary gave birth to Jesus and laid him in the manger. An Angel announced the birth of Christ to the shepherds. The shepherds visited the Holy Baby and spread the word around. The baby was named Jesus, as preordained, was circumcised, and was taken for the ceremony of purification. There Simeon, a God-fearing man, filled with Holy Spirit, held the baby in his hand and praised the Lord for bringing glory to the people of Israel. When Jesus was twelve years old his parents took him for the Passover ceremony as usual, but that year he did not return with his parents, and stayed back in the temple, with the Jewish teachers listening carefully, and asking intelligent questions. Jesus grew into a boy of great wisdom. While Herod was the ruler of Galilee, John the Baptist was appealing to the people to turn away from their sins and to get baptized. He also preached the Good News that one much greater than him is coming to baptize them with the Holy Spirit. He also spoke critically of Governor Herod and subsequently became imprisoned. When Jesus was about thirty years old the power of the Holy Spirit started radiating from him very powerfully and he was revered and praised by all. The Devil tried his level best to tempt Jesus through many tricks, but Jesus did not succumb to any of the tricks. But when Jesus went to Nazareth to read from the scriptures, He was not appreciated there. There is a saying that the darkest place is under the candle. Nazareth was the place where Jesus had been brought up. Yet people failed to recognize the Holy Spirit emanating from Him. The power embedded in Jesus started performing miracles. At Capernaum, a town in Galilee, He drove away the evil Spirit that had possessed a man. He cured the high fever of Simon’s mother-in-law. Learning about His miraculous powers, sick people started flocking to Jesus. A touch by his hand cured every one of them. He cured a leper of his leprosy. Once a paralyzed man was carried on a bed and brought to Jesus. He told the man that â€Å"your sins are forgiven you, my friend†. The listeners were puzzled by this, thinking that only god can forgive sins. They thought Jesus was impersonating God. The paralyzed man walked back home. Jesus was unconventional in many of his acts. He kept company with outcasts, supported and eating on Sabbath days, and even cured the crippled hand of a man on a Sabbath day. Gradually anger hatred and fear started building up against Jesus among the Pharisees and the teachers of law. Jesus went on healing and teaching the people who flocked to him. He even breathed life into a dead man. He assured the poor and the sorrow-stricken that there is a great reward awaiting them in Heaven. He taught them to shun violence. He spread the gospel of love. He warned people against judging others. Through powerful parables Jesus started driving great ideas into the minds of the people. As time passed, the number of miracles performed by the spiritual power of Jesus grew unbelievably. The fisherman who could not net any fish in spite of a hard day’s labor, caught netfuls of fish at the order of Jesus. A mob of evil spirits had been driven away from a possessed man into a group of swine. He calmed a storm in the ocean with a single command. A woman who had been sick for twelve days touched the robe of Jesus and got cured instantly. He raised from death the daughter of Jairus. Once He fed a crowd of five thousand with just five loaves of bread and two fish. Jesus had gathered His disciples from among the fisherman. He gave them power and authority to drive out demons and to cure diseases. In due course of time He told His disciples about His impending death and resurrection. He recruited more disciples and sent seventy two of them to different towns with the message of God’s love. To the skeptical teacher of law, He gave the parable of the Good Samaritan. He advised the Pharisees to keep their minds clean and worthy. He even told them that they â€Å"are like unmarked graves which people walk on without knowing it. † When one of the teachers of the law protested saying that Jesus was insulting them, Jesus accused them of holding the keys to the house of knowledge, neither themselves going in, nor allowing anybody else to go in. This infuriated the teachers and they wanted to wreak vengeance on Him. In the meanwhile Jesus went on enriching the peoples’ minds through the parables of the Yeast, Mustard Seed, the Narrow Door, the Unfruitful Tree, Faithful and the Unfaithful Servant, the Great Feast, Worthless Salt, the Lost Sheep and many more. His healing miracles continued as ever. He taught the people that the kingdom of God is within themselves. He reminded them that it is harder for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God than for a camel to go through the eye of the needle. Jesus drove the merchants from the Temple, and warned people to watch out for the Teachers of Law who take advantage of the weak. They wanted to kill Jesus and finally Judas under the devil’s influence agreed to betray Christ. During the Feast of the Unleavened Bread, Jesus broke the bread and gave it to His disciples saying that it was His body, and gave them the wine as new covenant sealed with His blood. He added that â€Å"the one who betrays me is here at the table with me†. Jesus also predicted the denial of Peter. Jesus was arrested after being kissed and identified by Judas, and Peter three times denied knowledge of Him, as predicted by Jesus. The elders of the Jews, the teachers and the Chief Priests asked Him if He was the â€Å" Son of God â€Å" and He answered â€Å" you say that I am â€Å". For claiming Himself to be God, they decided to punish Him and took Him to Pilate. Pilate sent for Herod. Pilate told the crowd that he did not find Jesus guilty, but the crowd shouted that Jesus must be killed. He was nailed on the Cross along with two criminals. At Jesus’ death, noon turned into darkness, and the curtain in the Temple tore into two. His body was received by Joseph of Arimathea and some ladies who were with him and He was buried. But the third day Jesus resurrected, as He had foretold earlier. Jesus later appeared before His disciples and then was taken into heaven. Conclusion: The word Gospel literally means â€Å"Good News†. But the Gospels in the Bible are more than â€Å"Good News†. They belong to the genre of biography and historiography. As biography it races the birth, growth, crucifixion, and resurrection of Jesus. As historiography it draws a continuous line from the scriptures, from Abraham, through Moses, David, and Isaiah to the age of Jesus. The gospel of St. Luke, from another perspective, is the exposition of God. Its power as scripture is simply unique.

Georgia v. Randolph Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact

In Georgia v. Randolph (2006), the U.S. Supreme Court found that evidence seized during an unwarranted search where two occupants are present but one objects to the search, cannot be used in court against the objecting occupant. Fast Facts: Georgia v. Randolph Case Argued: November 8, 2005Decision Issued: March 22, 2006Petitioner: GeorgiaRespondent: Scott Fitz RandolphKey Questions: If one roommate consents, but the other roommate actively objects to a search, can evidence from that search be deemed unlawful and suppressed in court with respect to the dissenting party?Majority: Justices Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, BreyerDissenting: Justices Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, AlitoRuling: Officers cannot carry out a voluntary search of a residence if one resident consents but the other resident objects. Georgia v. Randolph only applies in instances when both residents are present. Facts of the Case In May 2001, Janet Randolph separated from her husband, Scott Randolph. She left her home in Americus, Georgia, with her son to spend some time with her parents. Two months later, she returned to the home she shared with Scott. On July 6, police received a call about a marital dispute at the Randolph residence. Janet told the police Scott was a drug addict and his financial problems had caused the initial strain on their marriage. She alleged there were drugs in the house. Police requested to search the premises for evidence of drug use. She consented. Scott Randolph refused. Janet led officers to the upstairs bedroom where they noticed a plastic straw with a white powdery substance around the rim. A sergeant seized the straw as evidence. Officers brought both of the Randolphs to the police station. Officers later returned with a warrant and seized more evidence of drug use. At trial, an attorney representing Scott Randolph motioned to suppress evidence from the search. The trial court denied the motion, finding that Janet Randolph had granted police authority to search a common space. The Georgia Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s ruling. The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed and the U.S. Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari. Constitutional Issues The Fourth Amendment allows officers to conduct an unwarranted search of private property if an occupant, present at the time of the search, grants permission. This is considered the â€Å"voluntary consent† exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to examine the legitimacy of a search and seizure of evidence when two occupants of one property are both present, but one expressly withholds consent to search and the other grants it. Can evidence seized from an unwarranted search in this situation be used in court? Arguments In separate briefs, attorneys for the United States and Georgia argued that the Supreme Court had already affirmed the ability of a third party with â€Å"common authority† to give consent to search shared property. People who choose to live in shared housing arrangements must bear the risk of their co-occupant consenting to a search of common space. The briefs noted that voluntary searches serve important societal interests like preventing the destruction of evidence. Attorneys representing Randolph argued that the state relied on cases in which both occupants were not present. A home is a private space. Regardless of whether it is shared with one or more occupants, it is specifically protected under the Fourth Amendment. Allowing one occupant to decide whether or not the police may search the property over another occupant, would be choosing to favor one persons Fourth Amendment protections over another, the attorneys argued. Majority Opinion Justice David Souter delivered the 5-4 decision. The Supreme Court held that police cannot conduct a warrantless search of shared living space over the express refusal of a resident, even though another resident has consented. The consent of one resident does not override the refusal of another resident if that resident is present at the time. Justice Souter looked to societal standards for shared residences in his majority opinion. The Court relied on the idea that there is no â€Å"hierarchy† within a shared living space.  If a guest stood at the door of a home and one of the residents invited the guest in but the other resident refused to let the guest inside, the guest would not reasonably believe it was a good decision to step into the home. The same should be true for a police officer attempting to gain entry to search without a warrant.   Justice Souter wrote: â€Å"Since the co-tenant wishing to open the door to a third party has no recognized authority in law or social practice to prevail over a present and objecting co-tenant, his disputed invitation, without more, gives a police officer no better claim to reasonableness in entering than the officer would have in the absence of any consent at all.† Dissenting Opinion Justice Clarence Thomas dissented, arguing that when Janet Randolph brought officers into her home to show them evidence of drug use, it should not be considered a search under the Fourth Amendment. Justice Thomas argued that Ms. Randolph could have turned over the same evidence on her own if officers had not knocked on her door. A police officer should not have to ignore evidence offered to them, he wrote. Chief Justice Roberts wrote a separate dissent, joined by Justice Scalia. Chief Justice Roberts believed the majoritys opinion might make it harder for police to intervene in cases of domestic violence. The abuser could deny police access to a shared residence, he argued. Furthermore, anyone who lives with other people must accept that they have a diminished expectation of privacy. Impact The ruling expanded upon U.S. v. Matlock in which the Supreme Court affirmed that an occupant could consent to an unwarranted search if the other occupant was not present. The Georgia v. Randolph ruling was challenged in 2013 through the Supreme Court case Fernandez v. California. The case asked the Court to determine whether one persons objection, who is not present at the time of a search, could overcome the consent of a person who is present. The Court held that the consent of a present co-tenant takes precedent over the objection of an absent co-tenant. Sources Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (2006).Fernandez v. California, 571 U.S. (2014).United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164 (1974).â€Å"Conflicted Consent When the Objecting Tenant Is Absent - Fernandez v. California.†Ã‚  Harvard Law Review, vol. 128, 10 Nov. 2014, pp. 241–250., harvardlawreview.org/2014/11/fernandez-v-california/.