Q1. Please respond this question in a legal memorandum format.
Juan, an 18 year old Canadian, was wanted in Texas for inquiring about the death of a ex- roommate in Houston, Texas. He was arrested in Columbia, Missouri and arraigned on charges of breaking and entering a residence during the hours of darkness. Two days after the arrest he was arraigned and pleaded guilty to wrongful trespass. He was sentenced to 90 jail time in Missouri. At the trial in Missouri, he was represented by a public defender. While serving his jail time, he was visited by a police detective from Canada who questioned him about some murders in Canada and the murder in Texas. The detective read him his Miranda rights in English even though Juan's native languages were Spanish and French. Juan signed a form waving his Miranda rights and admitted in writing to having a fight with his former roommate and he orally stated that he may have hit the roommate with a baseball bat. After Juan was released from jail in Missouri, he was transported to Texas to stand trial for murder.
Please draft a memo regarding the legal issues in the case. What arguments may be presented to suppress the statement given by Juan while in the Missouri jail? Discuss the policy basis for your arguments.
Q2. Think about the ethical and moral implications of the law and legal processes before answer the following questions.
a. How would the natural law theorist's evaluation of the document differ from the evaluation of a legal positivism follower?
b. Compare and contrast how Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rosseau would evaluate the constitution.
c. How does the doctrine preached by Karl Marx differ from American realism?
2.1. Which Constitutional Amendments were the 'Civil War' Amendments? What was Congress's intent for each Amendment? How did these Amendments fracture the leadership in our country?
2.2. The year is 1915. Jon is an African-American who plans to travel to New York. He goes to the train station in New Jersey and attempts to board. The conductor stops him and points him to a passenger cart in the rear. The conductor tells him that 'his kind' must ride in a separate passenger car.
Jon follows the instruction and sits in the rear passenger cart. Only African-Americans are riding in his cart. He then remembers reading a recent news story about a school that would not allow African-American children to be in the same classroom as Caucasian children.
Jon arrives in New York extremely distraught. He thought that the Civil War Amendments protected his rights and that he could not be relegated to second-class citizenship. You are a Civil Rights attorney in New York. Jon comes to your office and explains the situation. Were the actions of the conductor (in New Jersey) constitutional? What is the case or statutory basis for your decision? What is your legal analysis on the news story he read? If you peered into your magic crystal ball, what relevant cases and statutes would you discover...thus informing Jon that good news is in the future?
2.3. If you decide to build a time machine to witness history changing for the better of all peoples,
What specific dates would you travel to, to see what specific leaders, to see what specific case, act, or statute passed? Why are your selections key moments in history?
2.4. How was the Civil Rights movement both Natural Law and Legal Positivism?