American jurisdiction

American jurisdiction

1. How many courts are in the Native American jurisdiction?

The Native American jurisdiction has tribal court systems that are federally recognized as Indian tribes. The courts are independent but get their powers from the congress and have various cultural and linguistic groups. The Native American jurisdiction has five hundred and seventy-three tribal courts; three hundred and forty in forty-eight states with judicial systems, while the rest are from Alaska native village.

2. What are the three fundamental differences between Native American courts and American courts?
3. Native American courts rely on the tribe’s written and unwritten laws and policies. Thus each tribe has its way of dealing with a criminal offense. American courts, on the other hand, operate under constitutionally recognized regulations and will convict the offenders using the documented laws.
4. The Native American courts follow the single standard and are less likely to record the policies used in the previous ruling. On the contrary, the American courts must follow a specific pattern and code the sections while making a ruling. For example, first-degree murder results in life imprisonment or death, and second-degree murderers are punished for a given period, longer than other crimes.
5. Both courts intend to shape the offenders into dependable people in society. However, the trial court’s decisions stem from the testimonies victim’s family members, as opposed to the state and federal courts.

2. When do Tribal courts have jurisdiction?

Tribal courts have the mandate to deal with child-related cases, such as kidnapping, rape, placement in foster homes domicile, and termination of parental rights.

3. Who has the highest misconduct rate?

The American courts have the highest misconduct rate compared to the native courts because of the full range of cases they handle. The majority of cases are dealt with at state and federal levels and can only be transferred to the tribal courts if they do not carry a high degree of crime.

5. What are the five necessary elements of punishment?

6. What are the four different sentencing philosophies, and what do they mean?
7. Incapacitation: Involves separating the convict from society to prevent harm to innocent persons. It often entails locking the criminal in jail, for a given period, or a lifetime, depending on their crimes.
8. Rehabilitation: in this context, the convicts are usually trained while serving the sentences to be better people in society before they are allowed to mix with the rest of the community.
9. Retribution: in retribution, the offenders must feel the pinch that is they are made to pay for the crimes they committed as a punishment. For example, murderers are punished with death or lengthy jail terms, while the destruction of properties requires the offender to compensate for the lost value.
10. Deterrence: In criminal justice, to deter a person involves subjecting them to punishments to match their offenses to prevent future crimes and to warn others against the same incident.

7. Presumptive Sentencing guidelines?

Presumptive Sentencing guidelines used when dealing with serious crimes such as murder or for repeat offenses.

1. When were they adopted?

The first presumptive Sentencing guidelines were used in Denver, Newark, Philadelphia, and Chicago. They were federally recognized in 1987 after Utah, Michigan, Washington, and Maryland, among other states.

1. What are the common aspects of this approach?

• The adoption of the guidelines depends on the cruelty of the misconduct, which will determine the amount of punishment given.
• Second, if the court is dealing with a repeat crime, he can use the guidelines. For instance, a person who has been sentenced for three or four times regarding the same crime is likely to receive heavy punishment than one who is a first time offender.
• The judge can employ an upward departure to the sentence, in case the offender possesses as an established threat to the community.

8. Truth in Sentencing Act

The systems tend to deny criminals paroles so that they can complete their expected jail terms.

1. What is the philosophy of the Truth in Sentencing Act?

The theory behind the Truth in Sentencing Act is to curb the possibility of early release or parole to allow the convicts to serve a considerable portion of the sentence before they are freed.

1. What is your opinion about this Act?

I support the Act as it ensures that criminals receive the expected punishments regarding the offenses. Hence, by the time of release, an individual will have experienced the pain, which will prevent them from breaking the law in the future.

9. Why is the death penalty called the “bloody code”?

Many crimes are punishable by death, aside from the apparent first-degree murder. The offenses are genocide, murder in the course of kidnapping, drug-related shooting, and terrorism. In the early centuries, such cases were connected to anything considered offensive and ranged from arson and forgery to stealing. Besides, the laws were made by the rich to protect their interests at the expense of the poor. Before the late 1880s, all offenders were publically hanged for warning the crowd and for forcing them into following the rules.

10. What is the five reasons the public’s opinion is important?
11. Ideally, the political leaders draw their powers from the crowd. Therefore, they must have a say in what type of leadership they are comfortable with.
12. Public opinion determines how things are perceived; the government can make informed decisions.
13. They determine the relationship between political parties and ordinary citizens.
14. Public opinion is the basis for democracy, and thus, political leaders have to answer to the citizens.
15. The opinions serve as social norms in that the values and beliefs of the majority of the citizens serve as the basis for democracy and shape political leadership.

11. Do you support extending the death penalty to primary opioid drug dealers (either doctors or significant drug dealers) to reduce the opioid crisis?

Extending the death penalty to primary opioid drug dealers is entirely pointless because the dealers already face death threats from the community and other dealers. Besides, they are always armed in case of such instances, and convicting one out of twenty drug dealers will not help. So instead of emphasizing on legislation, the government can use other methods such as awareness campaigns to reach a significant population.