Two landmark decisions of the United States of America Supreme Court, Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896) and Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) have a played a key role in anchoring constitutionalism and have provided a varied interpretation of the constitution in everyday judicial decisions. arriving at them. The rulings were important in shaping application of the constitution in practical terms (Plessy v. Ferguson) and also in securing the rights of the accused person in protecting his or her innocence (Miranda v. Arizona).
[...] The Miranda v Arizona ruling has also had the impact of shaping the practice of law and especially the application of the Fifth and Sixth Amendments of the constitution. References Amar, A. R. (2011). Plessy v. Ferguson and the Anti-Canon. Pepperdine Law Review, 39(75), 75-90. Retrieved May from http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4706&context= fss_papers Greene, J. L. [...]
[...] Retrieved May from http://www.twyman- whitney.com/constitutiontest/landmarkrulingssupremecourt.pdf Josset, J. L. (1996). May it Please the Constitution: Judicial Activism and its Effect on Criminal Procedure. Marquette Law Review, 1021-1040. Retrieved May from http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1555&contex t=mulr Schauer, F. (2013). The Miranda Warning. Washington Law Review, 155- 170. [...]
[...] The governments of the day were more Democrats than Republicans, hence the greater emphasis on civil rights and correction of perceived historical injustices. The ruling was as important as it was controversial, with some feeling that it was representing too much of libertarian ideology and would lead to an increase in crime by giving suspects too many rights while at the same time tying down the policeman's hands in their fight against crime. In both cases the passage of time proved the ruling wrong (in the case of Plessy v Ferguson) and right (in the case of Miranda v Arizona) (Josset, 1996). [...]
[...] The political ideology of the day always influences constitutional law interpretation as can be seen in both of these cases. In the Plessy v. Ferguson, the white majority of the day, while proclaiming equality of the races under the constitution, practiced a form of legally approved bigotry under the segregation laws of the day, which was clearly skewed in favor of the whites and treated the colored people as inferior beings. The decision handed down by the 7-1 majority of the Supreme Court was clearly in keeping with the political ideology that was at play in the society then, with segregation being implemented in many of the states and with the policy being enforced as a social standard and to maintain public health and safety. [...]
[...] That was the morality and argument that forced the Supreme Court to rule as it did. There were of course a minority who believed that those that were ignorant of the law did not deserve to benefit from its application but with the greater civic awareness and growth of the rights movement, the push for individual and human rights clearly won the day. 4.In the Plessy v Ferguson decision, the courts interpreted the US constitution in a narrow manner that has time and time again been shown to have been both wrong and short-sighted at the time. [...]
using our reader.