Module 5
Module 5
Readings
One reading Beyond the Supreme Court: Alternative Paths to the Control of Police Behaviors discussed how the courts have restrained police of their duties. In the article it talked about how the Warren court was sympathetic to narrow police behavior. The creation of rulemaking has altered the working environment of policing. I had a hard time understanding this article because I didn’t know if Walker was for or against administrative rulemaking. Well I believe that police have had to develop these policies in order for them not to violate the law. The policies are necessary for the protection of the public and their own. Officers might think it restraints them but they exist for a reason.
Another reading I liked was Bleeding Heart: Reflections on using the law to make social change. I thought this reading really agreed with our essay. The author begins by talking of his experience in New Zealand and what he observed. He writes that social change and legal change do not always walk hand and hand. He then describes “rule-shifting” is when the law alters rules and is effective, and it enforces those rules. He then defines laws “culture-shifting” is when the culture uses the law to individually or collectively promote values we think are to be rights. He uses the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to explain these concepts. The Act constituted “culture shifting” as well as “rule-shifting”. I thought this was a perfect example of social change but he also used it as opposites. “Rule shifting” can become “culture shifting”. The example given is the anti-smoking laws. When the anti-smoking laws became effective many people chose to give up smoking as a result of the laws it created social change.
The reading of Laws as an Implement of Social Chance described how laws can also cause social change. In the article it quoted “laws play an important indirect role in social change by shaping various institutions, which in turn have a direct impact on society”. The examples are mandatory school attendance, labor force laws, or even environmental laws. In the case of education the law prohibits racial discriminations and allows people who were at one time excluded of attending certain schools. The problems with using law as social change is the laws need to be enforceable in order to work. Lastly the laws also may create conflicts of interest which tend to determine which laws are passed and which are rejected.
Internet Sites
This site gives a critique of the civil rights movement and the laws.
http://www.ccadp.org/jamesrobinson5.htm
the following link talks about myths of homosexuals and their strive for social change
http://www.cprmd.org/Myths/MYTHS_PAGE.htm
So what ……?
I believe laws and the courts are very important players in social change. I am aware of the limitations of the courts being that they cannot enforce their rule of law. In my opinion they are still a pivotal in our system. The laws are also restrained because ultimately the courts interpret the law. The purpose of the check and balance system is for the entire system to not gain power of another and somehow find that middle ground. I think the law and the courts have demonstrated through out history their role in changing society and will continue to make changes.
Readings
One reading Beyond the Supreme Court: Alternative Paths to the Control of Police Behaviors discussed how the courts have restrained police of their duties. In the article it talked about how the Warren court was sympathetic to narrow police behavior. The creation of rulemaking has altered the working environment of policing. I had a hard time understanding this article because I didn’t know if Walker was for or against administrative rulemaking. Well I believe that police have had to develop these policies in order for them not to violate the law. The policies are necessary for the protection of the public and their own. Officers might think it restraints them but they exist for a reason.
Another reading I liked was Bleeding Heart: Reflections on using the law to make social change. I thought this reading really agreed with our essay. The author begins by talking of his experience in New Zealand and what he observed. He writes that social change and legal change do not always walk hand and hand. He then describes “rule-shifting” is when the law alters rules and is effective, and it enforces those rules. He then defines laws “culture-shifting” is when the culture uses the law to individually or collectively promote values we think are to be rights. He uses the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to explain these concepts. The Act constituted “culture shifting” as well as “rule-shifting”. I thought this was a perfect example of social change but he also used it as opposites. “Rule shifting” can become “culture shifting”. The example given is the anti-smoking laws. When the anti-smoking laws became effective many people chose to give up smoking as a result of the laws it created social change.
The reading of Laws as an Implement of Social Chance described how laws can also cause social change. In the article it quoted “laws play an important indirect role in social change by shaping various institutions, which in turn have a direct impact on society”. The examples are mandatory school attendance, labor force laws, or even environmental laws. In the case of education the law prohibits racial discriminations and allows people who were at one time excluded of attending certain schools. The problems with using law as social change is the laws need to be enforceable in order to work. Lastly the laws also may create conflicts of interest which tend to determine which laws are passed and which are rejected.
Internet Sites
This site gives a critique of the civil rights movement and the laws.
http://www.ccadp.org/jamesrobinson5.htm
the following link talks about myths of homosexuals and their strive for social change
http://www.cprmd.org/Myths/MYTHS_PAGE.htm
So what ……?
I believe laws and the courts are very important players in social change. I am aware of the limitations of the courts being that they cannot enforce their rule of law. In my opinion they are still a pivotal in our system. The laws are also restrained because ultimately the courts interpret the law. The purpose of the check and balance system is for the entire system to not gain power of another and somehow find that middle ground. I think the law and the courts have demonstrated through out history their role in changing society and will continue to make changes.
