The Correlation Between Laws and People

“The law is more than just a set of principles” that is what the professor in the film Talk of the town claims. This is a valid point that both supports the legal connotations of my case and stirs another rather provocative question. Can one simply ban a member of society from use of there restaurant merely because of the color of their skin, without as much as a kind hello? One would think that it is possible to do so since the owner has complete control of the housing and indeed pays the bills to keep the establishment from foreclosure. But isn’t it written in the constitution by our founding fathers that we as both citizens and human beings are entitled to general rights to enjoy a harmless lunch at a local restaurant, without being hassled by the owner at the students expense? When is a fine line drawn on cement that divides, impartial law from biased? These are lingering questions that we face everyday and in the 1960’s it was a significant pressing question as the issue of race came into play. The professor would have claimed that it would be unreasonable to evict the students involved in the William Mack Bell trial from the premises, but really the affable action for one to do is repeal the supposed Maryland law titled “ Robert Mack Bell v. Maryland”

“ Any persons or persons who shall enter upon or cross over the land, premises or private property of any person or persons in this state after having been duly notified by the owner or his agent not to do so shall be deemed guilty of misdemeanor”

But can such law be simply cast away since it has been set in stone and is a habitually practiced and well known law amongst white men in the state of Maryland and perhaps other states during the time per...

... middle of paper ...

...h there esteemed authority, to prove a position of solid ground for the justice of one man at the wrong place at the wrong time, justice will rein a pristine eagle for the people. Can one juxtapose both a written document with a spoken one? I for one am skeptical of this idea and I think Leopold would be on the same wave as me. Seeing as he is a man who is an advocate for empowering justice in the bodies of court systems and bringing corrupted politics to a rest. I think that there has to be a fine line between written document and spoken, democratic and republican, conservative and liberal, black and white. All of these are merely titles, a name, a reputation to uphold in high bounty. But when the final gavel thrusts down upon the bench of the court system, a leader will refute the action and in a sense, the people will be well represented.