Excellent Essay About The case Heien v. North Carolina

Historically, governments are established to structure and control numerous independent departments in order to provide economic, social, and political development of the country and guarantee order. In the US, the power is divided between the supreme power of state government and numerous local governments; such method of governance gained the form of federalism. Apart from the state governments, there are city governments that are usually called city councils in the United States. Moreover, each city council has numerous departments and committees that provide the efficient and coordinated work in many fields.
Such committees exist in the US Congress as well. They usually perform more specific functions as compared to the general duties of Congress. There are three main types of committees in Congress: standing, special, and joint. Standing committees have the legislative jurisdiction and, therefore, consider bills and issues, also recommending measures for consideration by their chambers. Special or select committees are usually established by a certain resolution of the chamber to conduct specific investigations or studies, and to consider measures. Joint committees are permanent units that include members from both, Senate and the House. These committees perform housekeeping tasks and conduct studies.
Let us consider one of such committees – the US Senate’s Select Committee on Ethics. The committee consists of six members – three democrats and three republicans with the democrat Barbara Boxer as the chairman and the republican John Isakson as the vice chairman. It is authorized to receive and investigate cases which may reflect upon the Senate, violations of law, violations of the Senate Code of Official Conduct and violations of rules and regulations of the Senate. The committee also can recommend disciplinary action and recommend additional Senate rules or regulations to insure proper standards of conduct. It is obliged to report violations of law to the proper federal and state authorities.
In the United States, federal judges resolve the matters brought before the US federal courts. Such judges are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Federal judges hear both, civil and criminal cases falling within their jurisdiction. There has been a dispute on whether federal judges should remain appointed as they are now or be elected. The subsequent paragraphs will focus on this topic presenting the arguments for the election of federal judges.
One plus of the direct elections of federal judges is that they make the candidates compete for the position. Just as in any other type of elections, judicial candidates participate in race making their figures public along with their beliefs, thus giving citizens a chance to thoughtfully choose the federal judge they want to see in court. On the contrast, personal beliefs of the appointed judges may not become known to the public until they become apparent in the result of one or another judicial decision. Furthermore, such judges would have four years before they would present themselves for voters for the first time in a retention election.
Summing up the arguments given above, the benefits of the elected judges become clear. Let us look at the profile of one federal judge to see what type of judges can be appointed by the president. John Glover Roberts is the chief justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. He was appointed by George W. Bush in 2005. Roberts’ personal beliefs are best described as conservative. He was born in Buffalo in 1955. The judge is a practicing Roman Catholic. He acquired his undergraduate degree in Harvard in 1976, finishing only three years. He also received his juris doctor from Harvard Law School in1979. Roberts studies history and specialized on British liberalism. He began his judicial career as a law clerk in 1977. Roberts used to work as special assistant to attorney, associate counsel to the president, attorney, and a partner of a law firm. However, one can see his first and the only appointment as a judge in District of Columbia Court of Appeals only in 2003.
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest federal court in the country. The Supreme Court selects its cases through considering petitions for writs of certiorari. There are certain rules for the selection of cases which can be considered only for “compelling reasons”. These reasons are: resolving a conflict in the interpretation of a federal law or a provision of the federal Constitution, correction and egregious departure from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings, and resolving an important question of federal law. Cases are decided by majority vote of the Justices.
The case Heien v. North Carolina illustrates how the Supreme Court works. The constitutional question raised in this case considers whether a police officer’s mistake of law provides the reasonable suspicion that the Fourth Amendment demands that a traffic stop must be justified? Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., declared the result of 8-1 on the count of North Carolina. The Court concluded that a search or seizure is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment if the police officer has made a factual or legal mistake.