تكلم مع الذكاء الاصطناعي
Legal Environment 4th Edition by Jeffrey Beatty, Susan Samuelson
النسخة 4الرقم المعياري الدولي: 9780324786545Legal Environment 4th Edition by Jeffrey Beatty, Susan Samuelson
النسخة 4الرقم المعياري الدولي: 9780324786545 تمرين 2
Go to www.cengage.com/blaw/beatty to find two current cases that interest you: one civil, one criminal. Explain the different roles played by each type of law, and summarize the issues in the respective cases.
التوضيح
موثّق
موثّق
There is currently an indictment charging former federal employee Marta Rita Velazquez with conspiracy to commit espionage. The charges claim that Velazquez introduced former U.S. Defense Intelligence Analyst (DIA) Ana Belen Montes to the Cuban Intelligence Service in 1984 and also accompanied her on a clandestine trip to Cuba to receive spy training. The indictment also claims that Velazquez helped Montes obtain her job as a DIA analyst. Since 1984, Velazquez allegedly received instructions from handlers in the Cuban Intelligence Service until 2002, when she left the U.S.A. Montes was arrested in 2001 and pleaded guilty to the charges of espionage in 2002. Velazquez remains outside the USA. Velazquez stands accused of conspiring with others to transmit to the Cuban government and its agent's documents and information pertaining to the U.S. national defense, with the intent that they would be used to the injury of the United States and to the aid of the Cuban government. She is also accused of assessing and recruiting people who had national security positions.
Because this case concerns espionage, an action which has been declared to be illegal by the U.S. government and is also considered to be counter to the moral principles of society, this case falls under the category of criminal law , and will accordingly be prosecuted by the U.S. government.
Remember, any law that has authority based on being passed by a legislative branch is called a statute, and is thus a statutory law. One source of law for this case is the Espionage Act of 1917, which is a statutory law, passed by the U.S. Congress and signed by President Woodrow Wilson. The Espionage Act states that anyone who attempts to hinder the operation of the U.S. Military or to aid in the enemies of the United States may be punished by 30 years imprisonment or the death penalty. Because this case concerns the relationship between an individual (Velazquez) and the state (U.S. government), it falls under the category of public law. The prescriptions that determine the severity of punishment for the accused and also the criteria by which Velazquez may be judged guilty or innocent are considered to be substantive law.
The case known as Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl is currently being heard by the Supreme Court. The specifics of the case are as follows: A woman gave her child up for adoption to a couple in South Carolina since she was raising the child on her own and the biological father, a Native American, had refused to provide child support and renounced his parental rights. After the child was given to the South Carolina couple, the father demanded she be returned to him. The biological father claimed he had not been properly notified of the adoption in accordance with the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) of 1978, which states that the biological parent and tribal government have the right to intervene in an adoption that would place an Indian child in a non-Indian household which states that the biological parent and tribal government have the right to intervene in an adoption that would place an Indian child in a non-Indian household. The South Carolina Supreme Court ordered the child to be returned to the biological father. The issues in this case are whether a parent can invoke the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (ICWA), 25 U.S.C. §§ 1901-63, to block an adoption voluntarily and lawfully initiated by a non-Indian parent under state law; and whether the ICWA defines "parent" in 25 U.S.C. § 1903(9) to include an unwed biological father who has not complied with state law to obtain legal status as a parent.
Because this case concerns the relationship between individual citizens, it falls under the category of private law. Furthermore, since the case involves the rights of specific individuals, it is a civil law case. Because the law at issue is the ICWA, a statute passed by a legislative body, it is also a statutory law case.
Substantive law defines the rights of individual parties within a case. In this case, the rights of the biological parent and the adoptive couple are at issue and must be determined by the U.S. Supreme Court based on the ICWA and other pertinent laws. Part of the biological father's argument was that he was not properly notified of the adoption, which is a violation of procedural law, that is, the law that governs the legal process. Furthermore, this case has already been heard by the South Carolina Supreme Court as well as the U.S. Supreme Court, but it is currently being heard by the U.S. Supreme Court. In order to have a retrial, the adoptive couple filed for a writ of certiorari, which essentially seeks a judicial review in a higher court and falls under the category of procedural law as well.
Because this case concerns espionage, an action which has been declared to be illegal by the U.S. government and is also considered to be counter to the moral principles of society, this case falls under the category of criminal law , and will accordingly be prosecuted by the U.S. government.
Remember, any law that has authority based on being passed by a legislative branch is called a statute, and is thus a statutory law. One source of law for this case is the Espionage Act of 1917, which is a statutory law, passed by the U.S. Congress and signed by President Woodrow Wilson. The Espionage Act states that anyone who attempts to hinder the operation of the U.S. Military or to aid in the enemies of the United States may be punished by 30 years imprisonment or the death penalty. Because this case concerns the relationship between an individual (Velazquez) and the state (U.S. government), it falls under the category of public law. The prescriptions that determine the severity of punishment for the accused and also the criteria by which Velazquez may be judged guilty or innocent are considered to be substantive law.
The case known as Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl is currently being heard by the Supreme Court. The specifics of the case are as follows: A woman gave her child up for adoption to a couple in South Carolina since she was raising the child on her own and the biological father, a Native American, had refused to provide child support and renounced his parental rights. After the child was given to the South Carolina couple, the father demanded she be returned to him. The biological father claimed he had not been properly notified of the adoption in accordance with the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) of 1978, which states that the biological parent and tribal government have the right to intervene in an adoption that would place an Indian child in a non-Indian household which states that the biological parent and tribal government have the right to intervene in an adoption that would place an Indian child in a non-Indian household. The South Carolina Supreme Court ordered the child to be returned to the biological father. The issues in this case are whether a parent can invoke the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (ICWA), 25 U.S.C. §§ 1901-63, to block an adoption voluntarily and lawfully initiated by a non-Indian parent under state law; and whether the ICWA defines "parent" in 25 U.S.C. § 1903(9) to include an unwed biological father who has not complied with state law to obtain legal status as a parent.
Because this case concerns the relationship between individual citizens, it falls under the category of private law. Furthermore, since the case involves the rights of specific individuals, it is a civil law case. Because the law at issue is the ICWA, a statute passed by a legislative body, it is also a statutory law case.
Substantive law defines the rights of individual parties within a case. In this case, the rights of the biological parent and the adoptive couple are at issue and must be determined by the U.S. Supreme Court based on the ICWA and other pertinent laws. Part of the biological father's argument was that he was not properly notified of the adoption, which is a violation of procedural law, that is, the law that governs the legal process. Furthermore, this case has already been heard by the South Carolina Supreme Court as well as the U.S. Supreme Court, but it is currently being heard by the U.S. Supreme Court. In order to have a retrial, the adoptive couple filed for a writ of certiorari, which essentially seeks a judicial review in a higher court and falls under the category of procedural law as well.
Legal Environment 4th Edition by Jeffrey Beatty, Susan Samuelson
لماذا لم يعجبك هذا التمرين؟
أخرى 8 أحرف كحد أدنى و 255 حرفاً كحد أقصى
حرف 255
