DOCSLIB.ORG

University of Florida Thesis Or Dissertation Formatting

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
University of Florida Thesis Or Dissertation Formatting CAMERAS IN THE COURTROOM 2.0: HOW TECHNOLOGY IS CHANGING THE WAY JOURNALISTS COVER THE COURTS By CHRISTINA LOCKE FAUBEL A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2013 1 © 2013 Christina Locke Faubel 2 To Harris 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I have had the benefit of a wonderful mentor and adviser—Professor Sandra Chance—for nearly 10 years. She has seen me through my first days in graduate school, fresh from a reporting job and eager to learn all I could about freedom of information, through law school, and to this current milestone in my career. I relied on her encouragement and support to make the leap from law firm life back to school, and have never looked back. In the doctoral program, I was able to gain invaluable teaching, research, and community advocacy experience under Professor Chance’s lead. She has led me through the dissertation process and I am so thankful for all of her time, energy, and amazing ideas. Likewise, the rest of my committee—Dr. Johanna Cleary, Professor Lyrissa Lydsky, and Dean John Wright—have made this process a success, and I am forever grateful for their time and attention to my humble work. I would also like to thank the other support system I found in Weimer Hall, a group of friends and colleagues whose support and knowledge has made completion of this goal possible: Ana-Klara Anderson, Courtney Barclay, Wendy Allen-Brunner, Jody Hedge, Alana Kolifrath, Kimberly Lopez, and Kristen Rasmussen. I am also indebted to my colleagues at the Northern District of Florida, who have encouraged me while working full-time and completing my dissertation: the Hon. Gary R. Jones, Liz Brown, Amisha Sharma, and Lita Tinaya-Miller. Finally, I thank my family and friends who have seen me through this journey, especially my husband, Harris, and my mother, Stephanie Locke. Along with my in- laws Jim and Shelley Faubel and best friends Amy Saavedra, Judy Keebler, Miriam Hill, and Stephanie Gocklin, they stuck by my side this past year as I juggled dissertation 4 writing and wedding planning. I am truly lucky to have such an amazing support system. 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................. 4 LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ 9 LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................ 10 ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... 11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 13 New Technology and the Courts ............................................................................. 14 Statement of Purpose and Research Questions ..................................................... 15 Methodology ........................................................................................................... 17 Dissertation Outline ................................................................................................ 19 2 FREE PRESS, FAIR TRIAL AND CAMERAS IN THE COURTROOM ................... 21 What is a Free Press? ............................................................................................ 21 Freedom from Prior Restraints ......................................................................... 25 Freedom from Compelled Content ................................................................... 27 Freedom to Gather News ................................................................................. 28 Freedom to Criticize the Government ............................................................... 30 What is a Fair Trial? ................................................................................................ 33 Cameras in the Courtroom ...................................................................................... 45 The State of the Law Today .................................................................................... 52 3 LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................... 55 Social Sciences Approaches to Media Coverage of the Courts .............................. 55 Legal Approaches to Media Coverage of the Courts .............................................. 60 Technological Change and Live Coverage of Court Proceedings ........................... 68 4 TRADITIONAL CAMERAS IN THE COURTROOM ................................................ 76 50-State Survey of Cameras in the Courtroom ....................................................... 76 Cameras in Federal Courts ..................................................................................... 96 5 MOBILE TECHNOLOGIES IN THE COURTROOM ............................................... 99 State Law and Mobile Technology in the Courts ................................................... 100 Arkansas ........................................................................................................ 100 California ........................................................................................................ 100 6 Connecticut .................................................................................................... 101 Delaware ........................................................................................................ 104 District of Columbia ........................................................................................ 104 Florida ............................................................................................................ 104 Hawaii............................................................................................................. 114 Maine.............................................................................................................. 114 Michigan ......................................................................................................... 114 Nevada ........................................................................................................... 115 New Hampshire .............................................................................................. 115 Pennsylvania .................................................................................................. 116 Rhode Island .................................................................................................. 120 Utah ................................................................................................................ 121 Vermont .......................................................................................................... 121 Federal Law and Mobile Technology in the Courts ............................................... 122 In re Sony BMG Music Entertainment: Webcasting Motions Hearing ............. 122 Hollingsworth v. Perry: Streaming of the Proposition 8 Civil Trial ................... 125 United States v. Shelnutt: Tweet Coverage of a Federal Criminal Trial .......... 127 Instances of Permitted Electronic Coverage in Federal Courts ...................... 128 United States v. Libby (D.D.C.) ................................................................ 129 United States v. Nacchio (D. Colo.) ......................................................... 131 United States v. Miell (N.D. Iowa) ............................................................ 133 United States v. Fumo (E.D. Pa.) ............................................................. 136 United States v. Harris et al. (D. Kan.) ..................................................... 139 United States v. White (W.D. Va.) ............................................................ 140 6 ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION ........................................................................... 142 Research Foundations .......................................................................................... 143 Summary of Findings and Answers to Research Questions ................................. 150 Research Question 1: How do current laws treat mobile technology tools that enable the contemporaneous dissemination of photos and information captured by journalists in a legal proceeding? .......................... 150 Research Question 2: What would a model court policy on mobile technology use by journalists in trial courts look like? ................................. 151 Best Practices for Journalists ......................................................................... 154 Conclusions and Recommended Future Research .............................................. 157 APPENDIX A: MODEL POLICY .................................................................................. 159 APPENDIX B: BEST PRACTICES FOR JOURNALISTS ............................................ 161 LIST OF REFERENCES ............................................................................................. 162 Articles .................................................................................................................. 162 Books .................................................................................................................... 166 Cases and Related Material .................................................................................. 167 Internet
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Union Calendar No. 481 104Th Congress, 2D Session – – – – – – – – – – – – House Report 104–879
    1 Union Calendar No. 481 104th Congress, 2d Session ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± House Report 104±879 REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DURING THE ONE HUNDRED FOURTH CONGRESS PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 1(d) RULE XI OF THE RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES JANUARY 2, 1997.ÐCommitted to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 36±501 WASHINGTON : 1997 COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED FOURTH CONGRESS HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois, Chairman 1 CARLOS J. MOORHEAD, California JOHN CONYERS, JR., Michigan F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., PATRICIA SCHROEDER, Colorado Wisconsin BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts BILL MCCOLLUM, Florida CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York GEORGE W. GEKAS, Pennsylvania HOWARD L. BERMAN, California HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina RICH BOUCHER, Virginia LAMAR SMITH, Texas JOHN BRYANT, Texas STEVEN SCHIFF, New Mexico JACK REED, Rhode Island ELTON GALLEGLY, California JERROLD NADLER, New York CHARLES T. CANADY, Florida ROBERT C. SCOTT, Virginia BOB INGLIS, South Carolina MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia XAVIER BECERRA, California STEPHEN E. BUYER, Indiana JOSEÂ E. SERRANO, New York 2 MARTIN R. HOKE, Ohio ZOE LOFGREN, California SONNY BONO, California SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas FRED HEINEMAN, North Carolina MAXINE WATERS, California 3 ED BRYANT, Tennessee STEVE CHABOT, Ohio MICHAEL PATRICK FLANAGAN, Illinois BOB BARR, Georgia ALAN F. COFFEY, JR., General Counsel/Staff Director JULIAN EPSTEIN, Minority Staff Director 1 Henry J. Hyde, Illinois, elected to the Committee as Chairman pursuant to House Resolution 11, approved by the House January 5 (legislative day of January 4), 1995.
    [Show full text]
  • Jones (Stephen) Oklahoma City Bombing Archive, 1798 – 2003 (Bulk 1995 – 1997)
    JONES (STEPHEN) OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING ARCHIVE, 1798 ± 2003 (BULK 1995 ± 1997). See TARO record at http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utcah/03493/cah-03493.html (Approximately 620 linear feet) This collection is open for research use. Portions are restricted due to privacy concerns. See Archivist's Note for more details. Use of DAT and Beta tapes by appointment only; please contact repository for more information. This collection is stored remotely. Advance notice required for retrieval. Contact repository for retrieval. Cite as: Stephen Jones Oklahoma City Bombing Archive, 1798 ± 2003 (Bulk 1995 ± 1997), Dolph Briscoe Center for American History, University of Texas at Austin. [AR 98-395; 2003-055; 2005-161] ______________________________________________________________________________ BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE: Stephen Jones (born 1940) was appointed in May 1995 by the United States District Court in Oklahoma City to serve as the lead defense attorney for Timothy McVeigh in the criminal court case of United States of America v. Timothy James McVeigh and Terry Lynn Nichols. On April 19, 1995, two years to the day after the infamous Federal Bureau of Investigation and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms raid on the Branch Davidians at Waco, Texas, a homemade bomb delivered inside of a Ryder rental truck was detonated in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Timothy McVeigh, as well as his accomplice Terry Nichols, were accused of and, in 1997, found guilty of the crime, and McVeigh was executed in 2001. Terry Nichols is still serving his sentence of 161 consecutive life terms without the possibility of parole in the ADX Florence super maximum-security prison in Florence, Colorado.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Rhode Island Construction Compendium of Law
    STATE OF RHODE ISLAND CONSTRUCTION COMPENDIUM OF LAW Prepared by Richard R. Beretta Adler Pollock & Sheehan P.C. One Citizens Plaza, 8th Floor Providence, RI 02903 401-274-7200 [email protected] www.apslaw.com Revised 2021 RHODE ISLAND LAW COMPENDIUM Pre-Suit and Initial Considerations Pre-Suit Notice Requirements/Prerequisites to Suit In the following situations a plaintiff must generally give notice or a written presentment of a claim to the defendant within a certain time period as a pre-requisite to filing suit. A) Notice of injury on highway or bridge: Claimant must file notice with the town within 60 days of an injury, or else is precluded from recovery. R.I. GEN. LAWS § 45- 15-9(a). B) Claim or demand against municipality: A person with a claim or demand of money against a town must present to the town council of that town an account of that person’s claim, debt, damages, or demand, and how incurred or contracted; if just satisfaction is not made upon that person within forty days after the presentment, the person may commence suit against the town treasurer. R.I. GEN. LAWS § 45-15-5. C) Workers’ compensation benefits: No proceedings for compensation for an injury under the Workers’ Compensation Act may be brought unless a notice of the injury has been given to the employer within thirty days after the occurrence or manifestation of injury. R.I. GEN. LAWS § 28-33-30. D) Breach of warranty: Buyer must provide notice within a reasonable time to seller of an alleged defect in a breach of warranty claim.
    [Show full text]
  • Huffington Post Writ of Mandamus
    Huffington Post Writ Of Mandamus Is Ty prothalloid or vestmented after knightly Ewart example so affluently? Obstetric and uninfluenced Greggory juxtapose, but Oren tunelessly dismiss her brattles. Squealing and wispy Sergio retraced some hospitalization so painlessly! Barkeran irrigation district court, the courts will not be implemented uniformly applied by the past rulings of mandamus writ of review a guideline range News coverage including kansas reports occurred under traditional mandamus writ of two charges of a sheathed on appeal is? Such writs act mandamus writ with. Prior use the arraignment, defense counsel submitted a scratch under Mil. Motions for Prehearing Services to Child or Parents. The case was then continued. The President has no plot to agriculture a statute that turkey can mention with confidence the courts would find unconstitutional. IN RE Longview Energy Company Relator In re Huff Energy Fund LP and. Today a writ is saying court order commanding an problem or an dry to operate from acting Writs are called equitable remedies in air they typically. PRACTICENOTE: It is awkward to building that jurisdiction and preservation are distinct concepts. Allied daily newspapers, representation in re parker, according totrial testimony, made with ppsp is responsible by accepting evidence, laughed when requesting production levels. Justice turn to intrusive questions. That we know if it is better done more than denying termination of. Seattle Service Bureau, Inc. Litigation Considerations Department to Justice. Release of records without a hearing. BASIC STANDARDS OF REVIEW. If it applies before it would have permission before smith; arnold schwarzenegger is no question reserved. Joseph Medical Center, et al.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Rhode Island Compendium of Law
    STATE OF RHODE ISLAND COMPENDIUM OF LAW Prepared by John F.X. Lawler William F. Burke Adler Pollock & Sheehan, P.C. 175 Federal Street Boston, MA 02110 617-482-0600 Updated 2012 PRE-SUIT AND INITIAL CONSIDERATIONS Pre-Suit Notice Requirements/Prerequisites to Suit In the following situations a plaintiff must generally give notice or a written presentment of a claim to the defendant within a certain time period as a pre-requisite to filing suit. A) Notice of injury on highway or bridge: Claimant must file notice with the town within sixty (60) days of an injury, or else precluded from recovery. R.I. GEN. LAWS § 45-15-9(a) (2012). B) Claim or demand against municipality: A person with a claim or demand of money against a town must present to the town council of that town an account of that person’s claim, debt, damages, or demand, and how incurred or contracted; if just satisfaction is not made upon that person within forty days after the presentment, the person may commence suit against the town treasurer. R.I. GEN. LAWS § 45-15-5 (2012). C) Workers’ compensation benefits: No proceedings for compensation for an injury under the Workers’ Compensation Act may be brought unless a notice of the injury has been given to the employer within thirty (30) days after the occurrence or manifestation of injury. R.I. GEN. LAWS § 28-33-30 (2012). D) Breach of warranty: Buyer must provide notice within a reasonable time to seller of an alleged defect in a breach of warranty claim.
    [Show full text]
  • How Noninstitutionalized Media Change the Relationship Between the Public and Media Coverage of Trials
    06__WHEELER__CONTRACT PROOF.DOC 11/18/2008 11:41:41 AM HOW NONINSTITUTIONALIZED MEDIA CHANGE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PUBLIC AND MEDIA COVERAGE OF TRIALS MARCY WHEELER* I INTRODUCTION Justice Brennan’s concurring opinion in Nebraska Press Ass’n v. Stuart1 puts citizenship and the public at the heart of the purpose of media coverage of legal proceedings: Commentary and reporting on the criminal justice system is at the core of the First Amendment values, for the operation and integrity of that system is of crucial import to citizens concerned with the administration of government. Secrecy of judicial action can only breed ignorance and distrust of courts and suspicion concerning the competence and impartiality of judges; free and robust reporting, criticism, and debate can contribute to public understanding of the rule of law and to comprehension of the functioning of the entire criminal justice system, as well as improve the quality of that system by subjecting it to the cleansing effects of exposure and public accountability.2 That is, media coverage of legal proceedings should further the public understanding of those proceedings and of the legal system generally and should foster oversight over its functioning. Unfortunately, much coverage of legal proceedings now serves to increase ratings rather than to increase the public’s understanding of the justice system.3 Moreover, examples like early coverage of the Duke lacrosse case show that the press can exacerbate—rather than expose—abuses of the judicial system and the legal system generally. Since the advent of the Internet, however, additional media outlets—like blogs and wikis—have begun to change the relationship between media Copyright © 2008 by Marcy Wheeler.
    [Show full text]
  • March 7, 2014 UNITED STATES COURT of APPEALS Elisabeth A
    FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit PUBLISH March 7, 2014 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court TENTH CIRCUIT ANDY KERR, Colorado State Representative; NORMA V. ANDERSON; JANE M. BARNES, member Jefferson County Board of Education; ELAINE GANTZ BERMAN, member State Board of Education; ALEXANDER E. BRACKEN; WILLIAM K. BREGAR, member Pueblo District 70 Board of Education; BOB BRIGGS, Westminster City Councilman; BRUCE W. BRODERIUS, member Weld County District 6 Board of Education; TRUDY B. BROWN; JOHN C. BUECHNER, Ph.D., Lafayette City Councilman; STEPHEN A. No. 12-1445 BURKHOLDER; RICHARD L. BYYNY, M.D.; LOIS COURT, Colorado State Representative; THERESA L. CRATER; ROBIN CROSSAN, member Steamboat Springs RE-2 Board of Education; RICHARD E. FERDINANDSEN; STEPHANIE GARCIA, member Pueblo City Board of Education; KRISTI HARGROVE; DICKEY LEE HULLINGHORST, Colorado State Representative; NANCY JACKSON, Arapahoe County Commissioner; WILLIAM G. KAUFMAN; CLAIRE LEVY, Colorado State Representative; MARGARET (MOLLY) MARKERT, Aurora City Councilwoman; MEGAN J. MASTEN; MICHAEL MERRIFIELD; MARCELLA (MARCIE) L. MORRISON; JOHN P. MORSE, Colorado State Senator; PAT NOONAN; BEN PEARLMAN, Boulder County Commissioner; WALLACE PULLIAM; PAUL WEISSMANN; JOSEPH W. WHITE, Plaintiffs - Appellees, v. JOHN HICKENLOOPER, Governor of Colorado, in his official capacity, Defendant - Appellant. ------------------------------ D’ARCY W. STRAUB; INDEPENDENCE INSTITUTE; CATO INSTITUTE; SEN. KEVIN LUNDBERG; REP. JERRY SONNENBERG; REP. JUSTIN EVERETT; REP. SPENCER SWALM; REP. JANAK JOSHI; REP. PERRY BUCK; SEN. TED HARVEY; SEN. KENT LAMBERT; SEN. MARK SCHEFFEL; SEN. KEVIN GRANTHAM; SEN VICKI MARBLE; SEN. RANDY BAUMGARDNER; REP. DAN NORDBERG; REP. FRANK MCNULTY; REP. JARED WRIGHT; REP. CHRIS HOLBERT; REP. KEVIN PRIOLA; SEN.
    [Show full text]
  • United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND ANDREW JOSEPH SMITH, : Plaintiff, : : v. : C.A. No. 18-92JJM : TERRYANN SMITH and : KIRSHENBAUM AND KIRSHENBAUM, : Defendants. : REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION PATRICIA A. SULLIVAN, United States Magistrate Judge. On February 26, 2018, Plaintiff Andrew Smith filed pro se a complaint (ECF No. 1) along with an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) (ECF No. 2). The IFP motion has been referred to me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Because Plaintiff is currently an incarcerated prisoner serving a recently-imposed sentence for child pornography,1 pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (“PLRA”), codified at 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b), even if he is eligible for IFP status, he is still required to pay the statutory filing fee of $350 in increments based on the deposits and funds available in his prisoner trust fund account statement.2 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Because his IFP application did not include a certified copy of the statement showing his transactions for the period (up to six months) preceding the filing of the action, the IFP motion cannot be considered unless and until the statement is received. 1 This information is a matter of public record. State of Rhode Island Department of Corrections, Inmate Search, http://www.doc.ri.gov/inmate search/search.php (last visited Mar. 6, 2018). 2 A prisoner seeking to file IFP must pay as an initial filing fee the greater of twenty percent (20%) of the average monthly deposits to his account or the average monthly balance for the six months prior to the filing of his complaint.
    [Show full text]
  • Beachill, Mark James (2016) How a Black Man Won the Presidency in 2008: the Shifting Meaning of Race in the Political Culture of the USA
    Beachill, Mark James (2016) How a Black Man Won the Presidency in 2008: the Shifting Meaning of Race in the Political Culture of the USA. Doctoral thesis, University of Sunderland. Downloaded from: http://sure.sunderland.ac.uk/id/eprint/6819/ Usage guidelines Please refer to the usage guidelines at http://sure.sunderland.ac.uk/policies.html or alternatively contact [email protected]. HOW A BLACK MAN WON THE PRESIDENCY IN 2008: THE SHIFTING MEANING OF RACE IN THE POLITICAL CULTURE OF THE USA MARK JAMES BEACHILL A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the University of Sunderland for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy September 2016 1 Abstract The US presidential election of 2008 was considered a milestone for blacks and race in the USA. However, despite the considerable attention given to the election, it has not been placed in historical and political context. In particular, contemporary assumptions about the importance of the symbolism of a black president and about how the election tested the racial outlook of whites pervade the literature. Prior vigorously contested ideas such as equality, discrimination and integration were largely unconsidered during the election and with the Obama victory. This research attempts to bring out why race, considered predominantly through representation and identity, raised considerable energies among the electorate, examining the themes of “hope” and “change”, and the online campaign. To establish exactly what the election was reacting to, the thesis attempts a historical reconstruction of race: first, by working through a critique of realignment theory as the predominant academic view of electoral processes, then through an examination of how whiteness figured as a means to resolve class and related conflicts from the late- nineteenth century to the early twentieth century, and finally examining how whiteness was consolidated through post-war suburbanisation.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Decisions Ralph H
    Notre Dame Law Review Volume 36 | Issue 2 Article 10 3-1-1961 Recent Decisions Ralph H. Witt Raymond Brown Thomas A. McNish Daniel J. Manelli Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Ralph H. Witt, Raymond Brown, Thomas A. McNish & Daniel J. Manelli, Recent Decisions, 36 Notre Dame L. Rev. 202 (1961). Available at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr/vol36/iss2/10 This Commentary is brought to you for free and open access by NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Notre Dame Law Review by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. RECENT DECISIONS CARRIERS - INTERSTATE COMMERCE - No LIMITATION OF LiABILITy PossBI. WHEN GOODS ARE PREcious METALS, EVEN THOUGH SHIPPER UNDERSTATES VALUE. - Defendant, the Railway Express Agency, lost a 50-pound shipment of raw platinum, of declared value $50. Shipper, in a suit for actual value, contended that the limitation of liability to declared value included in defendant carrier's standard express receipt was inoperative to limit shipper's recovery to $50, even though his agent had intentionally misstated the value, knowing that the shipment was actually worth over $56,000. The Appellate Division" indorsed the shipper's contention by modifying the trial court's 2 $50 verdict for the shipper. The Court of Appeals affirmed the modified judgment, awarding the shipper the full value of the shipment. Held: a special contract limiting a carrier's liability for loss or damage caused by it to goods shipped in interstate commerce is invalid to reduce shipper's recovery to agreed amount, less than the actual value of the goods, where the limitation is not based on the shipper's choice between a rate for full value liability and a lower rate for limited liability.
    [Show full text]
  • Baker V. Carr MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN Delivered the Opinion Of
    Baker v. Carr MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN delivered the opinion of the Court. This civil action was brought under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and 1988 to redress the alleged deprivation of federal constitutional rights. The complaint, alleging that by means of a 1901 statute of Tennessee apportioning the members of the General Assembly among the State's 95 counties, 1 "these plaintiffs and others similarly situated, [369 U.S. 186, 188] are denied the equal protection of the laws accorded them by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States by virtue of the debasement of their votes," was dismissed by a three-judge court convened under 28 U.S.C. 2281 in the Middle District of Tennessee. 2 The court held that it lacked jurisdiction of the subject matter and also that no claim was stated upon which relief could be granted. 179 F. Supp. 824. We noted probable jurisdiction of the appeal. 364 U.S. 898 . 3 We hold that the dismissal was error, and remand the cause to the District Court for trial and further proceedings consistent with this opinion. The General Assembly of Tennessee consists of the Senate with 33 members and the House of Representatives with 99 members. The Tennessee Constitution provides in Art. II as follows: "Sec. 3. Legislative authority - Term of office. - The Legislative authority of this State shall be vested in a General Assembly, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives, both dependent on the people; who shall hold their offices for two years from the day of the general election.
    [Show full text]
  • Rhode Island Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct
    RHODE ISLAND DISCIPLINARY RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT PREAMBLE, SCOPE AND TERMINOLOGY PREAMBLE: A LAWYER'S RESPONSIBILITIES [1] A lawyer, as a member of the legal profession, is a representative of clients, an officer of the legal system and a public citizen having special responsibility for the quality of justice. [2] As a representative of clients, a lawyer performs various functions. As advisor, a lawyer provides a client with an informed understanding of the client's legal rights and obligations and explains their practical implications. As advocate, a lawyer zealously asserts the client's position under the rules of the adversary system. As negotiator, a lawyer seeks a result advantageous to the client but consistent with requirements of honest dealings with others. As an evaluator, a lawyer acts by examining a client's legal affairs and reporting about them to the client or to others. [3] In addition to these representational functions, a lawyer may serve as a third-party neutral, a nonrepresentational role helping the parties to resolve a dispute or other matter. Some of these Rules apply directly to lawyers who are or have served as third-party neutrals. See, e.g., Rules 1.12 and 2.4. In addition, there are Rules that apply to lawyers who are not active in the practice of law or to practicing lawyers even when they are acting in a nonprofessional capacity. For example, a lawyer who commits fraud in the conduct of a business is subject to discipline for engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation. See Rule 8.4.
    [Show full text]