Explore this website: http://www.oyez.org/.
I especially encourage you to LISTEN to a case argued in front of the Court. You can scroll down to "New Media Releases" and you will see all the 2005 cases are now available. Alternatively, you may search by issue under "Browse Cases" in the top left corner. Some have audio and some only have transcripts. It is well worth finding one with audio - it provides a very different perspective.
Report back on the blog and tell us what you found on this website that was interesting to you. Be sure to read the comments that precede your's. A bunch of comments talking about looking at the Justices' chambers would be rather boring.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
First of all let me say what an amazing resource this website is along with the other two you gave us for assignment 11. I will be teaching social studies this fall and I think that these will be very helpful to my students as well. As for this website I found it to be very easy to use and very well organized. The virtual tour was amazing! I think that it is really good to give people who have not seen that building a chance to see it. This past semester I went through a week long conference in D.C. I had never been to the Supreme Court building before but got to on that trip. Aside from being an aesthetically pleasing building I could not believe how much history was crammed in. The museum downstairs was full of great statues are and information about the Supreme Court and it was really neat to view all the bust of old justices. However quite possible that coolest thing of that whole trip was when Justice Alito came and spoke to us. I was really neat to be able to reminisce and get to see the building in a different way.
I also took the time to listen to a case that was posted on the web site it was Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1. This case was discussing whether or not a public school could us a racial means to come up with a racial objective such as more racially balanced schools. When I first stared listening I thought it would be really hard to follow but I found that having the pictures of who is speaking along with the text made it much easier! As for the case itself it was really interesting and I very pertained to what we discussed the first week of class. However I felt sorry for the man presenting to the justices because if sounded and felt like has was being questioned for a murder. I know that this is not the case and the man was just doing his job it just seemed to be one question upon another with no time to answer. I felt that they might have had a better conversation if there had been more order. Overall I found the website to be a great tool that I am really glade to know about!
Tinker v. Des Moines Ind. Comm. School Dist., 1968. This particular case had a peculiar affect on me and my school. But in the afore mentioned case I , while reading the oral arguments I found it interesting that the attorney arguing for the respondents, (Tinker), kept interrupting Justice white who , although may have been playing devils advocate, seemed the be trying to shoot down the respondent’s argument. I would have bet early on that he (Justice White) would have dissented on this case, but he did not. This was to me a clear case of first amendment violations. The students, (High school and middle school) were wearing black armbands in protest of the Vietnam War. The principles of the schools decided to disallow ands suspend any student caught wearing the black armbands. Although the allowed other political type buttons or pins and even some iron crosses to be worn in school the black arm bands were not allowed. Children were suspended who wore them and consequently sued the school system for violating their constitutional rights. The justices found in favor of the students by a vote of 7-2. By the way Justice White voted with the majority in favoring the respondents claim. Even more ironic (to me) was the fact that Justice Black was one of the two dissenters, I would have bet otherwise as I read his comments to the respondent’s attorney. To get back to my high school, eastern high In Middletown Ky. In 1970 a long haired senior was suspended for refusing to cut his hair. He and his parents both said that I was his right to wear his hair the way he wanted to because it was his for of protest against the war. This little known fact never made it into the courier-journal. But while he was out students at my school protested his suspension and even stated they were not going to go to class unless the school administration rescinded the hair rule. After a week of skipping classes and protesting outside the school, the administration relented allowing long hair and even dropped the school dress code which allowed girls to wear “tube’ tops and hot pants to school. Man those were the days!
I listened to the case of Meredith v. Jefferson County Board of Education, 2006. I found this resource to be extremely intriguing. I liked how the audio corresponded with the text and appeared as the person was speaking the specific line and the text was also underlined when the person was talking. It was easy to follow along with if you wanted to read it. I also liked how the person’s picture appeared when they were speaking. I would prefer to read cases or any other type of long draft this way. I think it is more interesting and not as boring. It keeps me entertained and I comprehend what is happening more. If I had to read plain text that did not interest me (like the transcript for this case), I would not read it thoroughly like I should. By listening to the case and watching it like this website offers, it enables me to stay with it and comprehend it. Having access to this resource is also important because you will get feedback with what actually happened in the court room. You get the real conversations and you do not have someone “translating” what happened. You get to make your own decisions and own opinions about the views of the Justices and what the ruling was. The media is not influencing what the outcome was and giving explanations as to why it went the way it did. I will be sure to keep this website in mind because I found it to be very useful and I would like to see this kind of media resource with other subjects.
I actually never thought that there was a website like this for the U.S. Supreme Court. I looked over the site and was amazed that one could look up the cases, listen and/or read the arguments and see the conclusions that the court decided. I read the case Wilkie v. Robbins, which dealt with granting right-of-ways to the government across private lands. Harvey Robbins owned a ranch and the previous owner had granted the government the right to cross his land and the new owner, Mr. Robbins, refused to re-grant the right-of-way. Mr. Robbins alleged that the government harassed him with threats and charges, with the goal of getting the right-of-way. Mr. Robbins sued declaring that the government officials were using extortion in violation of RICO laws. Reading the transcript of the arguments, I was struck by the fact that even though the court was serious, there were times that seemed relaxed and bits of humor (to me) were evident. The whole argument started with Justice Scalla and Chief Justice Roberts talking about the microphone by saying:
JUSTICE SCALIA: “Mr. Garre, could you crank up the thing? The sound isn't working, I don't think, Mr. Garre”
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: “I think it needs a little upcranking. Good.”
I have no idea what upcranking is, but it seems funny. The whole thing about the case to me was about actions under the Federal Tort Claims Act. This issue was very evident and was brought up through-out the arguments. And the Justices equally grilled both attorneys when they presented their side of the case. In the end though, I felt that Mr. Robbins was not going to win his case, and when I read the conclusions of the case, he did not. In fact, he lost in a 7-2 decision.
What I like about this website is that, I learned a little about the Supreme Court, and I can say that I lived for over 8 years in Washington DC and never once step foot inside the building. But the virtual feature of touring the Supreme Court was interesting. It was nothing like Judge Judy.
This is in response to Bill Wren’s comments. I liked your story of the long haired senior who was suspended. To me, never having seen something like this is amazing. What I mean is that I knew that things like this had occurred during the Vietnam war era, but I never knew anything like this had happened here in Kentucky. Of course, I remember when I was in high school, we were not allowed to wear t-shirts outside of gym class in the school and could not wear shorts, and this clothing policy changed after several students were sent home for violating the dress code and student/parent complaints filtered in school board meetings. I remember when school was returning in the fall, that the new dress code allowed t-shirts (but not plain white ones) and shorts that came to the knee. It felt like a victory to the students. My mother told me of the time when women had to wear skirts or dresses and denim jeans were forbidden. It seems, over time, policies can and do change to reflect popular opinion or the will of the majority.
hey guys, i was late posting for wed, but i did want you to know that i posted about a group rallying this coming monday in frankfort opposing domestic partner benefits. so, if anybody wants to comment (hate on me) on that post, go ahead. see ya.
This website is very interesting and like everyone else has stated, an invaluable resource. I searched for a while around on old court cases just looking at who presided over them and what was going on in the years before I was born and what things were going on in the eighties and in the nineties. I ended up clicking on the 2003 case of Baldwin vs. Reese. I listened to this case for a while and it seemed to be all legal jargon. I was hardly able to follow any of it. However, I really enjoyed the scrolling text and the transcript at the bottom. This was an oral argument on whether a prisoner can bring up a federal claim to a federal court without bringing the claim up to the state court. This banter was very interesting as I was able to hear Justice Rhenquist and others. The back and forth between all of the parties is almost comical at times and you can obviously tell who has the power and who is nervous. I never knew this kind of resource existed and I am interested in searching some cases that I hear about as the years go on. What I could not believe was how far back the resources went. I was looking at cases from the 1700’s. I read about the 1793 case Chisholm vs. Georgia, where Chisholm tried to collect payment after the payee had died. This is incredible that this information is available to anyone at the click of a mouse.
Atkins v. Virginia
Docket: 00-8452
Citation: 536 U.S. 304 (2002)
This case deals with the death penalty and if it is cruel and unusual to give this punishment to a person with mental retardation.
I will agree with everybody who said how resourceful and interesting this website really is. I never really thought I could listen to all that stuff, but now I find it very interesting to really hear how a trial is conducted. The thing that I found the most amusing about the trial was how much of a "smart-ass) some of the members of the Supreme Court are. But their fast thinking and asking questions that would make the plaintiff (is that right?) either contradict himself or just start to mumble because he is at a loss of words. Another thing about the justice's; we all know that they are know a lot about the law and certain cases, but it blows my mind how they can just rattle off all this information during the trial. I thought it was very neat to hear an actual trial in progress.
Tyler Pittman
This website is very user friendly and provides an easy way to search cases and review their contents. Visitors of the site can search cases on the docket, featured media releases, new media releases, and news headlines. The website would be especially useful to individuals in law school because they would be able to listen to arguements and learn the approaches of the attorneys and the responses of the judges. By studying cases this would better prepare them for the courts.
One audio case that I listened to was found under the new media releases. The case was:
Meredith v. Jefferson County Board of Education, Oral Argument 12/04/06
This was a very interesting case and I enjoyed listening instead of reading the transcripts. It was interesting that every time a speaker changed their correlating photo also changed.
This case was regarding a mother feeling her and her son, Joshua, were treated unequally because he was not allowed to attend the school a block from his home because that school didn't have the greater percentages of either African-American or Caucasian.
After I listened to this case I went back to the homepage and did a search. I searched 'Kentucky' and there were several results.
One case that I opened within the search was Ashton v. Kentucky (1966). This website provided history of the case including pictures of the Supreme Court justices (by seniority) and showed their votes in the case. The case was about a bitter labor dispute in Hazard, KY. The petitioner accounted that he witnessed a plot to kill one pro-strike city policeman. The case was interesting and discussed police corruption and bribery.
Overall this website is interesting. After reading several of these cases I was reminded of a television drama such as Law and Order. Some of the cases seemed legitimate while others exhibited claims that were outrageous.
Tyler Pittman responding to
Bill Wren (Tinker v. Des Moines Ind. Comm. School Dist., 1968)
I found Bill's reply very interesting regarding the suspension of the students wearing the black wrist bands in protest of the Vietnam War. This case was in 1968 and I think it would be interesting to compare the types of cases regarding student's challenging the school as a result of a school's dress code violating the student's first amendment rights. The cases would have proabaly evolve from war protest to offensive music t-shirts.
_Tyler Pittman
Meredith v. Jefferson County Board of Education - Oral Argument I do relaize that there were two people that already commented on this one but it seem to be the only one that I COULD get to play and do the audio thing without having to read.It is the last day and all lol.
Anyway it seems that everyone that did respond about this one keeps saying this ones so interesting. Interesting I think not Racial yes it takes me back when a few of us replied that we don't need afirmative action. Anyhoo I find that it just has to Kenctucky that won't let you go to a certain school. First of all I think that this lady's fool of it and screaming minority she should have thought ahead and registered her child before the deadline and this wouldnt be happening.It seems so me as someone that got ticked off that didnt get there way as soon as they wanted it or how they wanted it. If it were my child I would have thought ahead to the school and thought the situation out and before taking it to the courts I would have did some ground floor things first demanding to know WHY the hell my child can't have a transfer/appeal and go to this school? ? ? ? Not just giving it a try then straight to the courts.
Liquor Mart Inc. vs. State of Rhode Island (1996)
That was the case I listened to involving a dispute over the right of the State to ban alcohol advertising in area where no alcohol was being sold. At question was the rights of the state under the 21st Amendment and violation of the 1st Amendment right to free speech. The most amazing part of listening to the case was the knowledge exhibited by the attorneys arguing the case and that of the justices. I'm quite sure the players were very well versed prior to the case, but to listen to these ladies and gentlemen spout off precedent after precedent and applying them to the question was incredible. Being a pessimist when it comes to lawyers, I was taken off guard by the abilities that these people possessed and moreso impressed by the manner in which the justices and attorneys could, without hesitation, cite the various opinions that related to the question. This site is going to be a must-view for my students. Typically, we have a defeatist attitude about the legal system in our area. By using the written transcript in conjunction with the audio feed, I can envision some serious study in how the Supreme Court deals with the question of free speech and permitted restrictions that are brought up on a regular basis. What I enjoyed most about the case was the manner in which the justices appeared to shoot down the petitioner's arguments, yet found in favor of Liquor Mart.
Just like all of the other comments already posted, I must say that I agree with everyone regarding how interesting this site is. The sources that are available on this site are unbelievable. I had no idea there was even a site like this to view, it is definitely one that is of great use for all different people and purposes. In my situation, I found this site to be very resourceful since I am beginning to go further in depth into my degree in criminal justice. Once I have finished my bachelor’s I hope to pursue a law degree and at that time I cannot imagine this site not being beneficial for me. I will be able to review cases and listen to a variety of different types and can only envision that this site will be advantageous to me. I viewed and listened to Will vs. Hallock, 2005. This was a child pornography case in which the Hallock’s (Susan and Richard) computers were seized by U.S. Customs Service agents. They were eventually cleared of any guilt and the computers were destroyed beyond repair. They then went on to try to sue the individual agents. They also cleared them as individuals.They went on to appeal this decision but they again were cleared, the Supreme Court ruled in a unanimous decision of 9-0.
The reason that I chose this case was because this is an issue that is of high importance to me due to having a one year old son. I am concerned and very interested in technology regarding the internet and what children can access and the effect that it might have on my child. This case is one that seems to be an ever popular problem in the news and obviously now in our court systems.
Post a Comment