Fluent Essays

These questions are based from the book The Brethren, which I have attached. Please be sure to open EVERY attachment, to ensure the success of this paper. The documents include thorough directions, a rubric, and both passages from the book. Please answer each questions fully and with supporting details. NO DIRECT QUOTES.1.Vacancies on the Supreme court can occur for many reasons. Describe a vacancy in The Brethren that occurs for internal or personal reasons. [One paragraph]. Describe a vacancy that occurs due to political reasons. [One paragraph]. What were some reasons for why certain people were not able to fill these vacancies? [One paragraph]. Why is a vacancy important to all branches of the national government and how does it relate to this course? [Two paragraphs]. (2) The Brethren begins with the end of Chief Justice Warrens time at the Supreme Court and the hunt for a new Chief Justice. Ultimately, Warren Burger was selected for the position. What qualities did Nixon like about Warren Burger which led Nixon to choose Burger as the next Chief Justice? [One paragraph with examples]. Based on your reading of the book, what were some personal qualities of Chief Justice Burger that made him a good leader and what were some personal qualities that led him into contention with other justices? [Two paragraphs using examples from book to justify your claim]. What should Chief Justice Burger do in order to overcome the contentions he develops with other Justices? [One paragraph]. pls320___reading_response_1_questions.pdf woodwardarmstrong_introprologue.pdf brethren_1969_term.pdf Unformatted Attachment Preview PLS 320 – Judicial Politics Reading Response #1 Due Sunday, May 24, 2020 by 11:59 PM EST INSTRUCTIONS The assignment below covers the Introduction, Prologue, and 1969 term in The Brethren by Bob Woodward and Scott Armstrong. You must answer both questions listed below. Your answers should demonstrate an understanding of the reading material. Your answers should be succinct and address all parts of the question. You will lose points for overly short and overly long answers -- the goal is to concisely, yet thoroughly answer the question, not write a treatise on it. A thorough answer includes examples from the text to support your answer. Your answers should NOT include long direct quotations from the Woodward and Armstrong book. If you paraphrase something from the book or cite a fact from it, then provide a citation in parentheses. If you are referencing material from The Brethren you can simply include the page number in parentheses. Do not worry about citing lecture. You should only use the course material and the Woodward and Armstrong book to answer the questions. The ONLY exception to this rule is if you need more information about a specific case in order to answer the question; if you do that, please include a full citation to your resource so that we can check it. Please type your responses with the following specifications. Failure to follow any of these will result in a two-point deduction for each error. • Times New Roman 12 point font • 1 margins on all sides • Double spaced • Each question begins on its own page • Identify the question by writing QUESTION [X] at the top of each page. • Submitted as a PDF file (File > Save As > PDF) The written assignment should be submitted to the assignment dropbox on D2L for Reading Response 1 (Week Two > Reading Response 1). This assignment must be completed by 11:59 PM EST on Sunday, May 24, 2020. No late submissions will be accepted. QUESTIONS (1) Vacancies on the Supreme court can occur for many reasons. Describe a vacancy in The Brethren that occurs for internal or personal reasons. [One paragraph]. Describe a vacancy that occurs due to political reasons. [One paragraph]. What were some reasons for why certain people were not able to fill these vacancies? [One paragraph]. Why is a vacancy important to all branches of the national government and how does it relate to this course? [Two paragraphs]. (2) The Brethren begins with the end of Chief Justice Warrens time at the Supreme Court and the hunt for a new Chief Justice. Ultimately, Warren Burger was selected for the position. What qualities did Nixon like about Warren Burger which led Nixon to choose Burger as the next Chief Justice? [One paragraph with examples]. Based on your reading of the book, what were some personal qualities of Chief Justice Burger that made him a good leader and what were some personal qualities that led him into contention with other justices? [Two paragraphs using examples from book to justify your claim]. What should Chief Justice Burger do in order to overcome the contentions he develops with other Justices? [One paragraph]. RUBRIC AND GRADING Category Completeness Knowledge Thoughtfulness Writing Response Rating Does Not Meet Standard Nearly Meets Standard (DNMS) (NMS) Response attempts Response addresses all to address all major major parts of parts of question but question either fails to but fails to completely completely address a address one subpart of major part or fails to the question address a subpart of the question Response Response makes one Response makes no contains major or multiple major factually multiple, major minor factually incorrect statements factually incorrect statements but incorrect has one minor statements or incorrect arguments statement Response does Response attempts Response provides not attempt to to provide novel and insightful provide any arguments or arguments/analysis, arguments or analysis, but the but fails to consider analysis attempt is poorly and respond to reasoned, objections, has exceedingly simple, reasoning that is not or fails to provide fully developed, or is support for claims otherwise unclear in made some aspect of the argument/analysis Response Response contains Response contains one contains enough multiple major errors major error (i.e., spelling, (i.e., spelling, spelling, punctuation, punctuation, punctuation, grammar, mechanical, grammatical, or grammar, or usage) that mechanical mechanical, or otherwise errors usage) detracts from a strong to make response understanding the content very difficult No Evidence (NE) Response misses one or more major parts of the question 50 point questions Category NE DNMS NMS Completeness 0 8 11 Knowledge 0 6 8 Thoughtfulness 0 13 17 Writing 0 5 7 Late submissions will receive a zero. MS 12 10 20 8 Meets Standard (MS) Response addresses all aspects of the question Response makes no factually incorrect statements Response provides a novel and insightful argument/analysis that anticipates and responds to objections, is fully developed, and logically clear Response is free of major errors, well-constructed, and smartly edited 70 BOB WOODWARD &. SCOTT ARMSTRONG Court, are not infallible). Seeing it as a state question, I join your opinion. Hugo Black had been ahead of his time for most of his life. Graduating from the University of Alabama Law School without high school diploma or college degree, he maintained a rigid read­ ing schedule of great books to compensate for his lack of fonnal education. Elected to the Senate in 1926, Black became a power­ ful Roosevelt ally. A colorful showman in Senate hearing rooms, Black supported Roosevelt down the line and was a controversial and powerful politician when Roosevelt appointed him to the Court in 1937. In three decades on the Court, Black had seen his early dissents become majorities. Black had provided the basis for many of the Warren Courts landmark decisions, and some ob­ servers even argued that the Black Court would be a more ap­ propriate title. Still driven by a burning evangelical need to persuade his col­ leagues of his views, Black worked intensely at the job. But after thirty years on the Court, he no longer felt ahead of the times. He was troubled by the many reports of disruptions in courtrooms across the country. The judiciary-federal, state, even the local po­ lice courts like the one on which he had served in Alabama-\\lll the real underwriter of American liberty. Black was fiercely protec­ tive of judicial independence and prestige. Yet antiwar and black activists had turned courtrooms into circuses. At the trial of the Chicago Eight in 1969, Judge Julius Hoffman was confronted with verbal and physical threats by defendants who had staged the antiwar protests at the 1968 Democratic National Convention . He had ordered one defendant, Black Panther leader Bobby Seale. shackled and gagged during the trial. In New York, another judge had been threatened repeatedly during pretrial hearings of thir• teen Black Panthers. At one time he was forced to postpone the hearings until the defendants observed court decorum. In the middle of the term, Black pushed to have the conference grant a hearing in a case (Illinois v. Allen) that dealt with the con­ stitutional limits on judges to control unruly defendants. In the Allen case the judge had expelled the defendant from the cou$ THE BRE.THRE.N 71 room. The case was thirteen years old, without any of the notoriety of the so-called political trials. But it provided the Court with an opportunity to tell trial judges how they could deal with disorderly courtroom behavior without violating the rights of the accused. Black thought that if the Court waited for the political cases to come up before it dealt with the issue, the waters would be mud­ died by such questions as the Vietnam War and police infiltration of black groups. The Allen case provided an opportunity to make a strong statement without any side issues. After oral argument and conference, only Douglas had reserva­ tions about the Court reaching out .to issue a list of constitutionally permissible actions that a judge might take to maintain order in the courtroom. The Chief assigned Black to write an opinion for the seven-member majority. Black relished the opportunity. The Sixth Amendment guaran­ teed a defendant the right to be confronted with the witnesses against him. But, Black wrote, the courts cannot be bullied, in­ sulted, and humiliated and their orderly progress thwarted and ob­ strncted. Calling courts palladiums of liberty and citadels of justice, Black said there were three things that could be done without violating the Constitution: binding and gagging the disor­ derly defendant; citing him for contempt; and expelling him until he promised to behave. Harlan, a believer in decorum everywhere, was so anxious to get Blacks opinion announced that he wrote a memo to complain that Douglas was taking too long in writing his separate dissent. Douglas intended no delay. He prided himself on being the fastest writer on the Court. He often turned out an opinion the day after an assignment; his separate opinions were ready weeks, if not months, before the majority opinions. His clerks often called these plane-trip specials, because they were written after the Friday conference on an airplane, as Douglas traveled to some speaking engagement. At times he mailed longhand drafts back to the Court, so that they could be printed and ready for revision upon his re­ turn. The other Justices alJ acknowledged Douglass brilliance and incredible productivity; White called him a paper factory. Douglas was so prolific that once when former Justice Charles E. ... Purchase answer to see full attachment