An American Legal History Law Research Paper Essay

Student’s Name
Facilitator
Course
Date
American Legal History
The United States legal system was adopted from the English common law into the federal and state level of governance after the Revolutionary War. Although the U.S legal system is a derivative of British law, it has a high divergence that is noticeable in its procedures and substances, and this is mostly related to civil law. The history of the legal system began with the pioneer 13 colonies that were under the settlers, but with time, certain practices were eliminated and replaced with those that fit the citizenry (Feinman 20). Moreover, some of the English laws that were eliminated from the U.S legal system include search warrants, and this was in accordance with the passage of the American Constitution. On the other hand, one of the laws that were inherited from the English legal system was the principle of stare decisis, a part of the common law. In this case, the common law courts can make decisions based on the precedent that was set, and they can also make laws that affect future cases. The critical analysis of American legal history will assist in understanding the origin of the legal system, reforms that have occurred over the years, and ways they affect the future judicial process.
ACLU’S Plan for Scopes Monkey Trial
In early 1920s, the legislature of the state of Tennessee made passed controversial legislation that prohibited all educational institutions in Tennessee State from teaching evolution. The passage of the Butler Act was an awakening moment in the country and marked a significant turning point in the constitutional development in America. In response to the enactment of the Butler Act, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) revealed that it would come to the defense of any educator prosecuted under the legislation. In due course, a high school teacher called John Scopes sought to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation by standing in a test case as a defendant in the case. In March 1925, Scopes was arrested and eventually arraigned in court for allegedly teaching evolution.
Scopes was represented in court by Arthur Garfield, who was the ACLU General Counsel alongside a famous criminal defense attorney known as Clarence Darrow. Darrow was a renowned, experienced, and competent criminal defense attorney in the country. In this case, the defense attorney collaborated to demonstrate the unconstitutionality of the Tennessee law because it was largely based on Biblical teachings. Ideally, the defense team argued that using the Bible as the standard of accuracy, validity, and veracity in public institutions is unconstitutional because it is a religious document (Leuchtenburg 134). However, not all people in the country subscribe to the same religious teachings. During the case, Bryan Jennings was the leader of the prosecution and he had a reputation for being the most popular Christian fundamentalist representative and defender in the country. Therefore, Bryan sought to prove that Scope had violated Tennessee laws and, hence guilty for teaching evolution.
The Scopes trial was a monumental landmark case, both due to its significance in the constitutional development of America and for being sensational. Most importantly, the case brought ACLU to the public limelight as it attracted the attention of millions of Americans. Interestingly, the case was also presided over by a conservative Christian judge who ensured that daily court proceedings began with a prayer. However, the judge denied the defense any opportunity to present expert opinion through scientific witnesses in court. Interestingly, Darrow acted cleverly by calling opposing judge and questioning him as the expert witness on Biblical teachings. During the court proceedings, Darrow humiliated the opposing counsel publicly buy questioning his interpretations of the Bible, which ended up undermining his credibility.
In the trial that lasted for only one week, and at the end Scopes was charged for the crime. Additionally, he was also supposed to pay a fine for the crime. However, the state supreme court made a swift decision and reversed the verdict reached by the jury on a technicality even before ACLU took it to the Supreme Court. In this regard, the resolutions that were achieved after the Scopes trial were influential, far-reaching and prominent as it resulted in the pronouncement of the Butler Act as unconstitutional legislation. Subsequent laws that outlawed evolution as a teachable lesson in institutions were also defeated in different states (Leuchtenburg 137). This marked a very significant stride in the development of the US constitution because the loss of religious fundamentalist cause signified the separation between theological teachings and scientific education. More importantly, it laid the foundation for the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment that forbids any law that tends to establish an official religion or unduly favor a specific religion.
Supreme Court’s versus Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Administrative Policies
When President Franklin Roosevelt was elected into office, he inherited a country that was in shambles. The country was on the verge of economic downfall, and one of Roosevelt’s highest mandates was to revive the country’s economy and set it on a new development path. As a result, Roosevelt introduced a series of austerity measures and programs geared toward improving the country’s economy (Leuchtenburg 144). Some of these programs include the establishment of the National Recovery Administration and Agricultural Adjustment Administration (AAA). While the NRA was an agency that was intended to enhance industrial mobilization, AAA was focused on reviving the agricultural sector in the country.
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court struck down these agencies and various acts of Congress that had established them. By striking down AAA and NRA, which were among the monumental Roosevelt’s programs, the Supreme Court thwarted the president’s industrial recovery plans. The court also unanimously outlawed the blue eagle, which was a poultry venture in Brooklyn. Despite the Agricultural Adjustment Act being a positive agricultural program, the Supreme Court termed it as unconstitutional. In most cases, the authority of the federal government over the country’s economy was prescribed in a clause within the US constitution, thus giving Congress the power to control and regulate interstate trade. However, the Supreme Court interpreted the law narrowly to the extent that it limited the power of Congress in legislation.
Similarly, Roosevelt faced an uphill task during the process of passing the Social Security Act and also other important legislations such as those that dealt with labor and workers. Indeed, confrontations with the court had seemed inevitable in Roosevelt’s administration. After the court had successfully torpedoed Roosevelt’s fundamental economic recovery programs, he also expected defeat and frustrations with the passage of these two bills. Interestingly, the confrontation was already in court, awaiting determination. Since it had become a norm, the court was also anticipated to strike down both legislations because it seemed that the court was very powerful and it limited the influence and authority of the state to legislate and change labor contracts. Realizing the reactionary actions of the court’s majority, Roosevelt sought power from Congress to replace Supreme Court judges due to retirement age. This marked one of the greatest struggles between the executive and the judiciary. It was also the most intense constitutional controversy about the judicial independence and power of judges to disregard popular will.
The Supreme Court and Economic Freedom
Although the Supreme Court is not bound to make decisions that revolve around taxation and it is responsible for guaranteeing freedoms of people, thy can sometimes influence the ways in which the public utilizes resources. Moreover, the Supreme Court has over the years steered the way towards economic freedom by protecting the Constitution through the numerous cases that are heard from its bench. The most notable cases includes the Slaughterhouse Cases (1873), which was a lawsuit filed by local butchers who sued the Louisiana state due to the failure to protect the locals from invasion by other slaughterhouses in the region. While the lawsuits was made on the grounds of the 14th Amendment and it challenged its violation, in the Supreme Court leading to a 5-4 ruling that it was not possible to guarantee monopoly. The case became a guideline on which economic freedom under the Constitution was not only withheld but also the protection of rights that facilitates operations of businesses.
On the other hand, the West Coast Hotel v. Parrish (1937) was a lawsuit that was made due to violation of the 14th Amendment with the complaint claiming that she was not being paid enough. While the hotel claimed responded by asserting that it had not violated any legislation as the freedom of contract was within the provisions, it was taken to the Supreme Court. Following the hearing, it was clear that freedom of contract was not exclusively highlighted in the Constitution but there was need to ensure equality. Resultantly, the Supreme Court approached the matter from a New Deal perspective and asserted that there was need for progressive reforms that would not infringe on economic freedom (Leuchtenburg 137). It was on the era of President Roosevelt that Supreme Court ruling led to the striking down of California Law citing it was against the Constitution. Moreover, the ruling became the backbone of economic freedom cases, and it set the precedent for consolidation of cases that were based on justifying the rights of Americans as enshrined in the Constitution.
Supreme Court Challenges When Overthrowing Jim Crow and Resolutions
The Jim Crow laws were enacted with the aim of separating the whites and the blacks thereby enforcing segregation. Therefore, Jim Crow became a figure of segregation and this prompted the Supreme Court ruling of 1896 that upheld that separation of persons was necessary as enshrined under the Constitution. Moreover, the local and state laws enforce the segregation of African Americans and whites, prompting individual to take charge of the situation, and this was marked through the Plessy v. Ferguson. The ruling argued that the laws were against the 14th Amendment since they did not guarantee the rights of all, but it was not until the Second World War that the Jim Crow laws were overturned. Moreover, the desegregation of American society was upheld through the case of the Board of Education of Topeka and Brown whereby the resolution asserted that all people are equal and that they should not be treated unfairly (Cottrol et al. 120). In this regard, the Jim Crow laws were dismantled by the Civil Rights Movement, and it was upon the Supreme Court to take up the matter and overturn the initial ruling. The decision to dismantle the Jim Crow legislation that had discriminated the African Americans was made on the grounds of prohibiting interracial relations and the challenge of the Supreme Court was remaining objective to the Constitution and fairness to the American citizenry.
Origin of the American Legal System
          Given that the United States legal system began with the arrival of the European settlers, there are many ways in which the actual act of adoption into American law took place.
The initial adoption of the English law into the U.S began with Louisiana State through the enactment of the "reception statutes" (Feinman 110). Judges made the statutes that were adopted from England law, and they asserted that it is applicable to the state level as long as it does not collide with the domestic law. Moreover, the passage of the common law was through a judge's pronouncement (Friedman 260). Still, it was later eliminated based on the dates that were set by the founders, and this eliminated vagueness in the legal system.
Resultantly, the current courts in the U.S cite the cases that were ruled or used during the pre-colonial era, and this affirms that the English legal the system was a basis and is still a reference point for the American legal system. An example of a common law that was enacted from the British system was the duty of care that was adopted to enhance the common carriers, and with time it became a part of the legal framework.
Although the federal law lacks the capability of making laws, the Constitution is the basis of legal actions from the common law, and it is replaceable at the state level, and this gives them the flexibility to make provisions in the absence of the Constitution. Moreover, there are limitations on the removal of the English common law in cases such as maritime law, and this gives the federal government the power to make changes that are relevant to legal matters (Leuchtenburg 23). However, the changes that the federal government can make on the common law are only limited to specific areas, and this means that the European common law is still practiced to date. Also, the federal law that has undergone an amendment from the British common law can be used in federal courts as long it has been initially granted permission to overrule the precedent. The federal courts are responsible for developing the judiciary system and act on the Constitution; there is no limitation of the type of action that can be made in reference to the common law.
Contrary to the state laws that can undergo amendment based on the common law, but it cannot supersede the Constitution, the federal law is used as a foundation of the federal courts and judicial acts. Moreover, the Founding Fathers formulated the Constitution as the reference point to make it the supreme document that put the judicial power on various federal courts but not eliminating the chance of making the precedent, English common law unreliable. Therefore, the shift towards the American legal system that is based on the citizenry needs and the Constitution founders were undertaken gradually, and it affirmed the need for the nation to have an independent legal system. While the Constitution that was created by the Founding Fathers had room for amendment, the judicial power that is anchored on the federal level of governance stipulates a persuasive precedent. Therefore, the cases that would change from the federal point of view would have a constitutional background, but there is a reliance on past cases.
Regarding the state law, it has undergone expansion based on the fundamental common law, and these changes are in response to the citizenry needs at the specific level, and these amendments have allowed its effectiveness. Moreover, state laws differ depending on the needs of the state, and this makes the United States legal system diverse as each region can custom its judicial order based on the modifications of the common law (Linder 45). While 50 different legal issues can be classified based on criminal law, property, or contract law, the Constitution is supreme; hence, the legislations can undergo an amendment to suit the local needs. In most cases, when state laws conflict which each other, there are ways of merging the rules that have been existence, but it cannot supersede the Constitution, which is a representation of the federal laws.
At the state level, the legislative organ is responsible for making laws and changing past statutes derived from the common law, and this promulgates the statutory authority that the judicial branch utilizes in its judgment. Moreover, the legal brand at the state level is charged with the interpretation, regulation, and application of the rules that can either be created or change from the common law (Larson 147). In individual states, codification is seen as the basis of acceptance on changes of the common law, and it is the reference point on which changes can take place; hence, a principle of the common law. Therefore, judges rely on the interpretation of the law and depending on the subject matter; they have the power to code the arguments to a level that assists in overriding the common law, and this helps in the creation of legislation. However, there are other states that have faced a restriction on the changes that can occur on the common law, and this hinders codification of the legislation.
American Law Primary Source
While the Founding Fathers created the Constitution as the supreme document; there are other derivatives of the primary law in the U.S, including statutory law, treaties, and the common law. While the American legal system began with the common law, and it formed the basis of the federal and state legislation, there have been innovations that have occurred resulting in constitution changes...