1.Research:Explore the websites provided to gather information on two landmark Supreme Court cases in order to compare the arguments for and against judicial restraint and judicial activism.
2.Write:Write an essay that compares and contrasts judicial activism and judicial restraint and presents your opinion on the debate surrounding these two philosophies.To get the best grade possible, follow the instructions in the assignment closely and answer all the questions completely. This assignment is worth 20 points.Use the provided websites to conduct research and answer the questions below. Your research will be critical to gathering the information necessary to write your essay. This section is worth 8 points.
1. Explain judicial restraint and the kinds of situations when it often comes into play. (1 point)Judicial restraint is where the judge limits the exercise of their own power and it comes into play when thejudge defers the issue to an elected official in the legislative or executive branches.
2. Explain judicial activism and the kinds of situations when it often comes into play. (1 point)Judicial activism is where the judge decides based on his/her opinion of what is best. These kinds of situations often occur when the judge tries to protect individual interests.
Info icon Subscribe to view the full document.
Subscribe to Unlock Right Arrow Icon
3. Explain the main arguments for and against judicial restraint. (1 point)For judicial restraintAgainst judicial restraintThe Constitution can only be interpreted by strict constructionist approachThe Constitution or laws made by legislature can be bague and be interpreted in different ways.
Answer: Ultramares corporation v. Touche established Ultramares doctrine. Hochfelder v. Ernst & Ernst ruled that scienter is required before CPAs can be held liable.
Explanation:
All the options except the above are true. Ultramares corporation v. Touche did establish the Ultramares doctrine.
United States v. Natelli sentenced two CPAs to prison for a year, in addition to fines, for violating the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Bily v. Arthur Young did not uphold the restatement doctrine. The restatement doctrine restatement doctrine makes an auditor liable to people who rely on the quality of his work be they his clients or third parties. Two high courts ruled that auditors are not liable to third parties who use their work but only to the party that contracted their work.
However, Hochfelder v. Ernst & Ernst ruled that an allegation of scienter (an intention to deceive) is not required before CPAs can be held liable as long as the actions constitute actual deception.
While rule 10b-5 of the Exchange Act states the presence of scienter as a requirement to commit an offense, the court ruled against the statute by eliminating the Scienter clause from criminal statute and ruled against Ernst & Ernst.
They acquired the Panama Canal Zone
According to "To Kill a Mockingbird," the answer
is found on page 144, at the end of chapter 13, Scout asks Dill why Boo has
never run away. Dill answers and says to her that maybe he has nowhere to go, nobody
to run away to. Who would receive him and also, he doesn't even come out of the
house to start with.
