11/17/2003 -  Laura, Fortuna, CA writes ...
Powell v. Alabama       Post to Main Thread   Reply to Laura

I think this trial was messed up! Those boys should of had a fair trial to begin with. Then again it was 1932!

4/26/2004 -  Dane, Paola, KS writes ...
Mapp v. Ohio       Post to Main Thread   Reply to Dane

This is the correct ruling, however, now with The Patriot Act which makes everything involving the 4th admendment irelative.

4/26/2004 -  Nate, Journey, ID replies to Dane 4/26/2004 ...
Mapp v. Ohio       Post to Main Thread   Reply to Nate

That is true Dane, however, not everything dealing with the 4th is now irealitive. It just makes it obslote.

4/26/2004 -  Nate, Paola, KS replies to Nate 4/26/2004 ...
Mapp v. Ohio       Post to Main Thread   Reply to Nate

Hey my name is Nate too! Hows them taters! Ha Ha!Anywho, i think if you dont agree with my friend here, i might f0xx0rs you then r0xx0rs joo bish

4/29/2004 -  GT, Jamaica, NY writes ...
Powell v. Alabama       Post to Main Thread   Reply to GT

I can't find what happened to the boys? Were they put to death? Did they receive a new trial? What happened to them?

3/22/2006 -  Roberta Robertson, Richmond, VA writes ...
Weeks v. United States       Post to Main Thread   Reply to Roberta Robertson

I think that the dicison made in this case was a very
logical descison. I also think that it was made in
thougt of all the American People.

2/4/2008 -  EV, GUYMON, OK writes ...
Griggs v. Duke Power       Post to Main Thread   Reply to EV

A very interesting case, on discrimination.

12/11/2008 -  BCF, Kingwood, TX writes ...
United States v. Cruikshank       Post to Main Thread   Reply to BCF

Once again I am shocked at how America treated black people and then gave freedom to the outlaws. It is no wonder that it took nearly 100 years to finally get some justice, but America has still not freed the Indians or given them the same rights as others. After all they had been here in the Americas for maybe 10,000 years.

10/7/2009 -  MDP, Loveland, CO writes ...
United States v. Cruikshank       Post to Main Thread   Reply to MDP

Both the District Court and Cruikshank share the same view of the First and the Second having been incoporated into the Fourteenth in 1868, and the Constitituion relative to unalienable Rights of man

The judicial rationale may not have been current, but the affirmation of the First Amendment and the Second were no less true for it. Why through out the baby with the bathwater?