The 1961 Supreme Court decision, Monroe v. Pape, establishes federal courts as the primary enforcers of federally protected rights by holding, that a person may bring a §1983 action in federal court without exhausting state remedies. For several reasons, as discussed in Justice Frankfurter’s dissent, the majority opinion in Monroe expanded §1983 beyond the intent of its draftsmen.
Three purposes of §1983 where established before Monroe: 1)to override discriminatory state laws; 2)to provide a remedy when state law is inadequate and 3)to provide a remedy when the state recourse is adequate in theory but not available in practice. In Monroe, Justice Douglas purports to establish a fourth aim of §1983- to provide a remedy in federal court supplementary to any remedy any state may have.
The majority opinion claims, among other things, legislative history for this invalid expansion of § 1983. The history behind §1983 is limited. However, there is much history for its predecessor the 1871 act. This history undoubtedly provides support for the first three aims of §1983 but little support is found for the Monroe created aim. In short the legislative context for both ...
Need Writing Help?
Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.Check your paper »
- The civil courts from time to time infringed upon the jurisdiction of Syariah Courts before Article 121(1A) of the Federal Constitution was modified by the Constitution (Amendment) Act 1988 (Act A704) which came into force on 10 June 1988. The infringement by the civil court upon the jurisdiction of the Syariah Courts caused vast concern among those interested or involved in the management of Islamic Law. A committee lead by Tan Sri Syed Nasir Ismail was established by the government to look into the position of Syariah Courts and urge measures to raise their status.... [tags: Federal Constitution, civil courts]
1166 words (3.3 pages)
- How have tribes used the federal courts/ Supreme Court to protect their rights. Some of the ways Native people have used the both federal courts and the Supreme Court to protect their rights are by filing petitions, sometimes at the same time treaties were being presented, Native people also used the courts to seek legal protection and address grievances. In the Supreme Court Native people address Tribal Sovereignty, and the so called “Indian Law”. We hear a lot about the treaties between the U.S government and Native people, but what we don’t hear a lot about are the many petitions the Native people sent to Congress meanwhile treaties were being created and signed.... [tags: Native Americans in the United States]
1122 words (3.2 pages)
- In response to The Civil War Congress enacted The Civil Rights Act of 1871 subsequently known as 42 USC § 1983. Section 1983, applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, provides a civil remedy for persons who are deprived of constitutionally protected rights by persons acting “under the color of law”. The 1961 Supreme Court decision, Monroe v. Pape, establishes federal courts as the primary enforcers of federally protected rights by holding, that a person may bring a §1983 action in federal court without exhausting state remedies.... [tags: essays research papers]
789 words (2.3 pages)
- State the title of the article, the name of the publication in which it appeared and the date of publication. The article I have chosen titled “Sommet leader Brian Whitfield sentenced to 20 years” was published by The Tennessean on June 8, 2015. Provide a summary of the news story, with emphasis on the facts. A previous leader of The Sommet Group, Brian Whitfield, was accused and found guilty after a plea of not guilty to stealing money from clients and the government in the amount of $20 million.... [tags: Jury, Judge, United States federal courts]
1194 words (3.4 pages)
- Roper v. Simmons is a perfect example of the evolving role of the Supreme Court, the sources the Supreme Court used to reach the ruling in this case is quite questionable. While I agree with the Supreme Court about protecting the younger citizens of America the Supreme Court must have the law to back up their ruling. Though in this case they do not the Supreme Court used a combination of foreign policy, moral decency, and state laws as the legal foundation for this decision. None of these things are appropriate sources for deciding what is constitutional and what is not.... [tags: local vs federal government, murder]
2549 words (7.3 pages)
- American courts play an essential role in our justice system. America has a dual court system; state and federal. They both have three main courts and all of them have their own jurisdictions. The federal supreme court is the only court that can decide future of the whole country. There is more to the American courts than just state and federal courts. The American courts can be confusing due to the numerous types of courts such as state, federal, supreme, criminal and civil courts. There are a larger number of courts and some of them are inferior courts.... [tags: Supreme Court of the United States, United States]
1580 words (4.5 pages)
- ... The act also assigns power go both the provincial and federal governments. The constitution is Canada's supreme law, and any government, whether it be federal, provincial, or territorial, that passes laws that are inconsistent with the constitution are invalid. Canada's constitution is similar to that of the UK and there are four unwritten elements to the constitution; federalism, democracy, constitutionalism and rule of law, and respect for minorities. All of the provinces (excluding Quebec) follow the common law system.... [tags: common law, judges, supreme]
734 words (2.1 pages)
- Juvenile Courts in United States Persons aged below 18 years are regarded as underage and when they break the law they are not charged in the adult courts. They are charged in the young offender courts which are also called Juvenile courts. For an offender to be eligible for juvenile court, he or she must be under the state’s laws categorized as a juvenile. The age of 18 years is the maximum age at which an offender can use juvenile courts. The applicable age in a few states is 16 or 17 years, while Wyoming State has 19 years as the maximum age.... [tags: Criminal Justice]
1688 words (4.8 pages)
- In 1995, there was great consternation when the Supreme Court ruled that carrying a gun near a school was not interstate commerce. On May 15, 2000, there was great consternation when the Supreme Court ruled that rape was not interstate commerce. It is a sign of how twisted the law has become that each of these common sense rulings was by a narrow 5 to 4 majority. While the 1995 case involved a federal law against carrying a gun within a certain distance of a school, this year's case involved a woman suing two men for rape under a federal law.... [tags: overextension of federal power]
728 words (2.1 pages)
- The jurisdiction of the federal courts is defined in Article III, Section 2, of the Constitution, as extending in law and equity to all cases arising under the Constitution and federal legislation; to controversies to which the U.S. shall be a party, including those arising from treaties with other governments; to admiralty and maritime cases; to controversies between states; to controversies between a state, or its citizens, and foreign governments or their subjects; and to controversies between the citizens of one state and citizens of another state.... [tags: essays research papers]
1052 words (3 pages)