Best Answer

Supreme Court cases diminished the scope of the exclusionary rule?

User Avatar

Wiki User

11y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: What supreme court case diminished the scope of the exclusionary rule?
Write your answer...
Still have questions?
magnify glass
Continue Learning about American Government

Who represents the judicial branch?

The Judicial Branch consists of the Article III courts and their judges or justices:US District CourtsUS Court of International TradeUS Court of Appeals Circuit CourtsSupreme Court of the United StatesThe Supreme Court is head of the Judicial Branch, but does not make up the entire branch, as some people believe.

How does the supreme court usually rule in cases that involve overcrowding in prisons?

The Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of issues. Their scope is only to interpret the Constitution. The premise of overcrowding in prisons is that it is an improper living condition violating human rights. The Court has mandated that the Federal Government establish standards for prison populations.

Does the US Supreme Court have the right to issue a writ of mandamus?

Yes. The US Supreme Court has discretionary authority to issue writs of mandamus when the case falls under their jurisdiction. Supreme Court Rules, Rule 20, outlines the conditions under which the Court may issue such a writ.A Writ of Mandamus (Latin, "we command"), classified as an Extraordinary Writ, is an order compelling a public official, corporate officer, or agency to take a specified action within their scope of responsibility.For more information, see Related Links and Related Questions, below.

Suppose a member of Congress was upset over the way the Supreme Court was interpreting the Constitution and proposed a law that would restrict the Supreme Court's ability to hear cases on appeal?

Such a law would be unconstitutional, since the United States Constitution specifically establishes the judiciary and its scope of power in Article III.Article III, Section 1 establishes the judiciary:"The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office." Article III, Section 2establishes the Supreme Court's scope of responsibility (excerpt): "The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;--between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects."There are plenty of examples of people, including Congressmen, who have been unhappy with the High Court's rulings, or with its perceived political leanings. But the Court's mission is to contribute to the government's system of checks and balances, and to interpret the Constitution and legislation, not to cater to the preferences of any individual, party, or political group.If enough members of Congress are at odds with the Supreme Court's interpretation of a law, they can change the law. They cannot, however, restrict the Court's power as granted by the Constitution.See Related Links for the full text of the U.S. Constitution, Article III.

Why did the Supreme Court consider the Judiciary Act followed in Marbury v Madison unconstitutional?

In the case of Marbury v. Madison, (1803), the Marshall Court declared Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789unconstitutional.The Judiciary Act of 1789, which extended to the Supreme Court original jurisdiction over issuing writs of mandamus (a court order requiring an official to take - or refrain from taking - an action within his or her scope of authority). The Court declared that portion of the Act, Section 13, unconstitutional because the Constitution did not specify issuing writs of mandamus as one of the Supreme Court's areas of original jurisdiction. According to Marshall, Congress had overreached its authority by attempting to make the Court responsible for all writs of mandamus.Chief Justice Marshall determined that reviewing acts of the Legislative and Executive branches was within the Court's appellate jurisdiction, and that declaring laws unconstitutional and overturning legislation was within the scope of its authority.As a result of this reasoning, the Court declared it did not have the authority to compel James Madison to deliver Marbury's commission, allowing him to take office as justice of the peace of the District of Columbia.Some Constitutional scholars argue that Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution should be interpreted to include issuing writs of mandamus to government officials, based on this sentence:"In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction."The argument, in this case, is that James Madison should be considered a "public minister."Case Citation:Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137 (1803)

Related questions

What supreme court diminished the scope of the exclusionary rule?

Supreme Court cases diminished the scope of the exclusionary rule?

What court established its broad scope?


What court case established its broad scope?


What is the scope of the supreme court's jurisdiction?

read the constitution

The final interpreter of the scope of the civil liberties of Americans?

The Supreme Court

What does it mean by 'What is the scope of the US Supreme Court'?

The Supreme Court can not hear every type of case. Article III, section 2 of the Constitution lays out the scope of the Supreme Court's jurisdiction. You should be aware that the Supreme Court almost never asserts original jurisdiction, instead hearing nearly all cases (except disputes between different states) on appeal.

Should the US Supreme Court abolish the Federal Reserve?

The US Supreme Court does not have the authority to abolish government agencies and departments, unless the agency is created under legislation that is challenged in court and determined to be unconstitutional. This is outside the scope the the Supreme Court's responsibility.

Supreme Court ruling have been key to broadening the scope of which expressed power?

Commerce Power

The first time the Supreme Court interpreted the full scope of the First Amendment was?

One of the first times that the Supreme Court interpreted the full scope of the First Amendment was in 1925. The case was that of Gitlow v. New York.

What role did the U.S. Supreme Court in ending Reconstruction?

The Court restricted the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment by leaving its enforcement up to the states.

What role did the U.S supreme court play in ending reconstruction?

The Court restricted the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment by leaving its enforcement up to the states.

What is the final interpretation of the content amd scope of America's civil liberties?

The content and scope varies with time, but the final arbiter at any given time is the U.S. Supreme Court.