As Americans currently look to reform the nation’s criminal justice system, with its high incarceration rates and immense racial disparities, plea bargaining is an important consideration. In a plea bargain, also known as a plea deal, the defendant agrees to plead guilty or “no contest,” in exchange for the prosecutor to drop one or more charges, reduce a charge to a less serious offense, or recommend to the judge a specific sentence that is acceptable to the defense. In turn, this allows the defendant to receive a reduced sentence. [1] A plea bargain is a facet of the American criminal justice system that initially became commonplace in the 1920s in order to expedite the trial court process. The prevalence of plea bargaining is constantly being reexamined as the United States reconciles constitutional principles and legal precedent with historic prejudices in its criminal justice system.
Read MoreFor decades, physician-assisted suicide (PAS) and the right to die have been at the center of numerous legal battles. The “right to die” covers more than just “pulling the plug” on life-sustaining treatment. It also includes suicide, which is done without the assistance of a physician, as well as other practices that are done with the guidance of a physician. Such practices include passive euthanasia, assisted dying, active euthanasia, and most recently, physician-assisted suicide. Although the legality of PAS largely depends on the attitude of the respective state government, one could argue that the banning of physician-assisted suicide violates the Due Process clause of the 5th Amendment because the choice to end one’s life during unceasing pain—especially when one’s death is imminent— should be included in one’s right to life. Furthermore, a court’s refusal to recognize the right to die allows the actions of PAS-administering doctors to fall under “affirmative aid in dying,” which exposes doctors to prosecution for murder.
Read MoreThe U.S. Department of Justice’s failure to indict the police officer who killed Eric Garner has revived public calls to overhaul our criminal justice system. While these calls target racial profiling and brutality, the recently decided case of Flowers v. Mississippi spotlights a more obscure, but critical issue: how we define “a jury of one’s peers.”
Read More