Defining Social Justice by dom scibilia

2016-01-29 18:44:10 UTC

McGuire, Walsh, Chambers, Thornell, Applegarth

2016-02-01 02:10:53 UTC

Definition: Social Justice is the fair relation between the individual and the society. Based on the Supreme Court decision, there is a lack of social justice for women in the workplace because they were not allowed to form a class involving all women for better overall treatment, creating an unfair relationship between women and the corporate world.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZG6NvA_e9-VMwfMM2DRsWqWmudFdo66MriNDqNyJQSk/edit

Alfonso, Burgess, Chirichella, Horton, Karol

2016-02-01 04:10:33 UTC

Social Justice occurs when there is a problem (whether it be economical, political, or social) in society and either those in power or someone who is part of the community decides to try and correct that problem. In the terms of this court case the problem, or societal injustice, was that Hobby Lobby Inc. refused to cover the health insurance dealing with emergency contraceptives like Plan B, ella,or IUDs (intrauterine devices) because it was against the company’s religious beliefs and the person in the community who tried to rectify that problem was Sylvia Burwell, the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

The US Supreme Court decided 5 to 4 in favor of Hobby Lobby Stores Inc.

The decision was based on the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 which upholds the religious freedoms guarenteed by the First Amendment.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/122uYFpQVxl4sJGMqYdG9YQNfrP9tAQUuLI_miIpTAl4/edit?ts=56aed3f0

Eric, John, and Reyes

2016-02-01 18:06:12 UTC

Social Justice is the term one uses to define if a society works for goodness based on a common or individual goal based on their code of ethics. The Supreme Court takes unjust actions when they turned a blind eye to a woman who was clearly being sexually harassed by office superiors. The employee was constructively discharged after her supervisors made hostile work environment. They also accused her of stealing computer skills examination papers. The employer claimed affirmative defense and was correct because she did not properly report sexual harrassment. Pennsylvania State Police vs Suders (2004)

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OeHb_W-g8Vz64tSwRJBrQFfH6rKO2KrDXuFZK7d5WsQ/edit

Novello, Ortega, Kuhl, Prokop, Chambers

2016-02-01 18:08:06 UTC

Social Justice is the fair and equal treatment towards a person or community despite their race, gender, wealth , or ethnicity. Our case was the Grutter vs Bollinger case in 2003. Barbara Grutter, a white resident of Michigan, was denied acceptance to the University of Michigan Law because of the university using race as a factor in how they choose who is accepted into it.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/10UVG_6pvKJruRAK6YWSkMME-3vn9dCUunjPDPUWZbSk/edit

Singh, Lonergan, Jones, Santos Harrel

2016-02-01 18:17:35 UTC

In the context of ethnicity, social justice pertains to the prevention of active discrimination against certain groups, usually minorities. An ethnic group is a socially distinguishable group (whether it be through race, religion, or the language they speak) that has developed its own subculture and sees one another as a part of their group. This can be identified by food, language, or even music. They share a common peoplehood and often have the same ancestry. Because there are many different groups, tensions and conflicts are bound to arise. The groups that are lesser in population tend to be abused because of their lack of power. The U.S. court system has the categorical imperative to put an end to this injustice. A difference in culture is no reason for violence and abuse. While the courts play a huge role in social justice, everyday citizens such as ourselves also play a role in ending structural and institutional discrimination. Even at our lunch tables, we can practice social integration and not exclude others because of their ethnic differences.

2016-02-01 18:18:31 UTC

The case was brought upon the supreme court by the women of Wal-mart. Betty Dukes filed a class-action lawsuit against the store stating that women should be equally paid and have the same opportunities. Wal-mart argued that there was too much diversity between all female employees, therefore they could not be a class. The Supreme Court ultimately sided with Wal-mart.

Ethnicity Group Case (Singh)

2016-02-01 18:18:51 UTC

In the 1987 case “Shaare Tefila Congregation v. Cobb,” a jewish synagogue was vandalized with anti-semitic slogans. The defendants stated that these actions were not charged based on prejudice and that the Jews are not an ethnic group because of their caucasian ancestry. The court unanimously ruled that the Jews are protected as a distinct ethnic group under U.S.C. Section 1982, even though they are caucasian like the defendants. The statute "was intended to protect from discrimination identifiable classes of persons who are subjected to intentional discrimination solely because of their ancestry or ethnic characteristics." The congregation was ruled to be discriminated against because of ethnic characteristics, which is illegal. This is an example of social justice being enacted to uphold the fundamental constitutional right to property.

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1986/85-2156

2016-02-01 18:20:08 UTC

Does this Supreme Court case go against the 14th Amendment?

The Supreme Court ruling stated that race was not a major factor because schools do not just look at race as a factor, the schools look at many other factors.

Sullivan, Ukegbu, Hotz

hotzb — 2016-02-01 18:23:50 UTC

The two sides of this case are the Obama Administration (Defendant) and the state of Texas. The message about social justice exemplified by the probable outcome of this case is that illegal immigrants in the United States are not appreciated or protected about by the majority. People in the US do not wish to protect the rights of illegal immigrants. There are many reasons for this, but the outlying cause for their immigration are the horrible conditions that these people migrate from, which many of these protesters in the case fail to recognize. This group of individuals are marginalized socio-economically and face racism and discrimination by the United States government. Their marginalization in US society reflects how much progress we need to make in order for our country to be diverse and tolerant of these migrants. The Supreme Court’s decision so far is undoubtedly based on the welfare of those with documented civil status. However, the case is still ongoing

https://docs.google.com/a/spprep.org/document/d/12mLmhJDkJwU5hEujr1MbxFVpKz4LFKnwokwGsIh9BVk/edit?usp=sharing

Dawoud, Owens, Thybulle

dawoudg — 2016-02-01 19:06:56 UTC

Social Justice is equal treatment of all people of all communities disregarding their social identity.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-820_j426.pdf

Roselva Chaidez came to America in 1971 as a permanent resident and the pleaded guilty to mail fraud in 2003 connected to an insurance scheme. Her attorney advised her to plead guilty which she did and she received a 4 year sentence. The government was going to deport her under a federal law stating that any immigrant committing an aggravated felony. She fights the supreme court saying that her lawyer did not inform her of these consequences. The result is that she was

What specific topic is this related to? and the presentation is incomplete thus demonstrating a lack of preparation.

Giunta, Birdsall, Espino, Abrams, Policastro

2016-02-01 19:11:38 UTC

This issue revolves around Same sex MarriageThe two sides of the case are Obergefell vs. Hodges. This is a civil rights issue because of marriage licensing and legal unions. This was primarilly a state issue because ruling Gay marriage was in charge of the state. Also, this allows for joint purchases, tax, credit, legal recognition of marriage for inheritance purposes and becoming a joint economic entity. This is included in the topic of social justice because social justice means equality for all especially in a governmental and legal sense. Those against the ruling state that it is an infringement of states rights and religious freedom to impose such a ruling. Those in favor of the ruling feel that it entalis a greater sense of equality as a nation for LGBT couples. Allows for legal equality not attained before. The court ruled in favor of same sex marriage striking down all bans on Gay marriage.

https://docs.google.com/a/spprep.org/document/d/1nQtDOt7h0RghAXMn8lzQGXQXOleMd6oIkmvbTwBzc34/edit?usp=sharing

Zawistowski, Dobbs, Steffen, Mazhar, Alberti

2016-02-01 19:14:01 UTC

Meredith vs. Jefferson County Board of Education

This case is about a rule implemented by the Jefferson County of Board of Education. The Board of Education issued a rule relating to enrollment after 2000 saying that student enrollment was decided on the basis of several factors, including place of residence, school capacity, and random chance, as well as race. But most importantly, a school could not have an African American population less than 15% and more than 50%. Crystal D. Meredith and her parents sued the Board saying that this violated the 14th Amendment.

Crystal Meredith claims that the district violated the Fourteenth Amendment, "all persons born or naturalized in the United States,” when it rejected her application to enroll her son at a nearby school on the basis of race.

The Supreme Court will have to determine whether racial diversity in K–12 public education is a compelling state interest and whether the district’s racial range mandate is narrowly tailored to further that interest. Jefferson County schools requires 15%-50% to be African American, Crystal Meredith thought this violated her 14th amendment when her son was rejected and she was forced to make him enroll somewhere else just because of his race. The result was 5 to 4 in favor or Merdith.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aE1mo-LwlaA9qswbu49rW5idR9ox7DWjhEpJJc5ueCw/edit?usp=sharing

Ruvo, Novak, Chmiel, Issac, Cuccinelli (Ethnicity)

2016-02-01 19:16:30 UTC

Grutter v. Bollinger (2003). The school just wanted diversity within its student body. She lost on the basis that the court said that affirmative action was not unconstitutional. It was not the only factor that determined whether someone would be accepted into the school. The school showed there are many other factors that also affect a person’s acceptance.

Barbara Grutter was a white woman aspiring to attend Michigan Law School
student had the scores and the grades for Michigan Law and was denied, she filed a lawsuit and won the case. She filed the case on account of the 14th amendment.
The two sides of the argument were that Grutter stated that race was the ONLY determining factor in the acceptance. While the Supreme Court Justices said that there are many other factors when considering acceptance.
Social Justice is the fair and equal treatment of others between an individual and a society.
https://docs.google.com/a/spprep.org/document/d/1JMdAcFmuY8pEln905OXmAyya0Q1zT2D3GGmlGUG8h1Y/edit?usp=sharing

Robbins, Murphy, McEwen

jrobbins1 — 2016-02-01 19:17:46 UTC

In 2015, the case Obergefell vs. Hodges focused on gay marriage. It started off as several court cases from other states challenging the constitutionality of same-sex marriage bans. The same-sex couples challenged the notion that marriage was just available for members of the opposite sex. The defendant in this case was Richard Hodges, the Director of the Ohio Department of Health. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Obergefell and his co-plaintiffs, and they were able to open the eyes of the justices to see an expanded view of what marriage is, not just between two membersof the same sex, but between anyone who loves each other.

Cholankeril, Freeman, Shah, Ribeiro,

2016-02-02 01:46:15 UTC

Social justice happens when a act of discrimination occurs in society. When the target group is faced with equality disregarding their social identity and giving them fair treatment, social justice has just taken place. In the case Fields v. Smith, Fields represents Andrea Fields and Kari Sundstrom, two transgender inmates that have been taking hormones since the 1990’s and Smith in the state of Wisconsin. The transgender inmates were denied the access to receive hormone treatment and sex surgery by the state of Wisconsin. This law outlawing treatment for transgenders is unconstitutional because it singles out transgenders by giving them harsh punishments and does not subject them to equal treatment as the other inmates are receiving.
Social justice took place when the Supreme Court recognized transgender inmates with regards to humanity and human rights and giving them the same equal treatment as all inmates in Wisconsin prisons.
The Supreme Court ruled Act 105 to be unconstitutional that restricts health treatment and surgery to transgender people. Transgender citizens are now able to get equal treatment and receive the treatment and surgery that they were requesting in the state of Wisconsin.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WbCh6NPPYggFcMnBgZ1LebZRMi2vSHeiFbiqo_-VO8M/edit

Omslaer, Kirchner, Wedgbury, Thieroff (Civil Rights)

2016-02-02 02:23:47 UTC

In the world of civil rights, social justice is very important. It is the central argumentative point in many debates. Social justice entails that people be treated the same. In other words, this idea supports the notion that all people would have the same rights and benefits as other people no matter race, ethnicity, gender, etc. and no matter what circumstance (workplace, society, home, etc.). In the world of social justice, there would be no privilege because all would have access and the right to fair and equal treatment.
In the Young v. UPS case, the plaintiff, Peggy Young, accused UPS of not providing accommodations (a light duty route) for her in her pregnant state while the company would provide accommodations for people with similarly disabling infirmities, regardless of gender, because it would be too expensive. The majority decision decided that there were grounds to argue that UPS had violated the intentions of various laws including the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The dissenting view explained that the Congress wanted to create equality in the workplace between those pregnant and not (including men), but they did not want to make a “most favored nations” for pregnant employees. However, since the Justices did not truly support each side, they redefined the PDA and the legal issue of it. They used empowerment to give pregnant women the same rights as other with disabilities in the work force and the means to rectify any issues through legal processes and no unjust profit because the Supreme Court ruled that companies cannot used expenses as a reason to not provide accommodations.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Uv1tcNoWzoMbP9ui4uxIaxMjiR6maBGWSA7GNXxCIOI/edit

Lucas Coleman, Geroll Vedar, Guido Salandra, Aaron Such (Immigration: Arizona vs the United States)

2016-02-02 04:45:16 UTC

Social justice is the equal protection of all people under the law and a system which is not rigged in favor of those born with the necessary resources or characteristics to succeed. Social justice means that those who work hard ought to be rewarded, even if they can’t advance far into society because they were born into a lower income family. People are born with certain rights, and the government must maintain these rights. Looking at the issue of immigration, society falls short. They are discriminated against by xenophobes and have trouble fitting in. There are laws passed against them such as those struck down in our Supreme Court case which basically permitted racial profiling. No person should be placed under more scrutiny than another because they were born somewhere else, or look differently, factors which they cannot control. De jure discrimination such as this leads to institutionalized discrimination, ingraining this nativist and hateful mindset in the populace. Additionally, these immigrants are unprotected by law and are exploited by employers. Arizona even tried to make it a crime for them to seek work, even though federal laws dealing with the same issue decided to not punish the immigrants who were simply trying to provide for themselves and instead targeted the employers who could exploit them and seek an unjust profit.

Case Information:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zPyNnyRR146--le6V4EKgkYDu6w_baohA1JefPcoIAU/edit

Kingsley, Gallo McDermott, Zuckerman, Tanas

2016-02-02 12:37:37 UTC

In the Samantha Elauf vs. Abercrombie Case, Samantha fought claiming they refused to hire her because of her ethnicity and culture. Due to her muslim beliefs, Elauf wears a headscarf. During the case, the manager of Abercrombie and Fitch admitted to lowering her application score because of the head scarf she wears. Elauf won the case with a landslide 8 to 1 vote in the Supreme Court, as she was discriminated against because the policy was meant for the majority and disregarded against the minority.

Social Justice is when the majority treats individuals and minorities of all gender, race, religion, and ethnicity fairly and equally not only in the workforce, but in everyday life.https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EqMMy8WZCX142H04iJll0WV7ElMBmXHtiD0gWHUL9LQ/edit

Phillips, McAndrews,Coleman

2016-02-02 13:37:17 UTC

Social justice means that each person, regardless of race, gender, or disability, should have equal opportunity in the sense that they should not be treated differently. Each person should have the same rights regardless of their hereditary differences.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IKIfHLcdEDwjJGUXDeiwD7lvSq7ZgnWtcEjRDhsoVXc/edit