Judicial Decision Making Analysis Research Paper

Judicial Decision Making Analysis - Research reputation ExampleThe West Virginia State School Board v Barnette is a case in point. The arbitrary Court had ruled that states squeeze outnot compel students to salute the American flag. No punitive action whatsoever could be taken either against the students concerned or their parents/guardians. In fact, it was an overruling of an earlier decision in Minersville School regularise v Gobitis. The very purpose of the Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the shoot of majorities and officials (as cited in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 1943). The court decreed that it was essential to keep much(prenominal) subjects outside the influence of majorities so that numerical strength by way of legislation would not walk the rights of minorities. Similarly, administrative orders and decisions were open to arbitrary interpretations on the part of officials. These were not all-encompassing and were rigidly enforced. Such decisions eer left people with grievances. Legal Subculture Every profession breeds its own culture within the over-arching culture of a place. While culture by itself is a relative term, a similar work atmosphere creates mutual conditions which lead to common aspirations and withal a common world view. Hence, a legal subculture develops which comprises all those problematical in the judicial process. These include legal practitioners, students of law and the administrative support personnel involved. A extensive interaction with law makes even the seekers of justice imbibe the nuances of law. Such seekers are known to become cheerful with legal jargon, which is derisively known as legalese in common parlance. Hence, the influence of legal subculture on those who bore it is even greater. There is a constant exchange of ideas between people of the same profession which is excessively th e case here. What prompted the ruling in this case (or the overruling of the Minersville case) is also the effect of the legal subculture to an extent. No decision can be taken in isolation. Human factors when coupled with people in a similar surround lead to such rulings. That the earlier decision had been overturned shows the influence of the public on the legal sub-culture in this case. The figure six-to- triplet for the ruling was not arrived at the spur of the moment. It was only due to deliberations among the various judges that resulted in this ruling. The sub-culture is primarily responsible for the exchange of ideas among the Justices in this context. It must also be remembered that the three dissensions are also due to the same sub-culture which allows divergent views to manifest and coexist with the majority views. Judicial Background The Gobitis case had had a profound influence over the Barnette case. It can be said that it was a curtain raiser to what unfolded three ye ars later. There had been a review by the judges examining the Barnette case in the light of the earlier ruling. The court ruled that compelling school children to salute the flag was unconstitutional. The Court found that such a salute was a form of utterance and was a means of communicating ideas (The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago, Kent College of Law). The unconditional flag salute was in violation of the First Amendment which