Warning: Use of undefined constant no - assumed 'no' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/austra01/public_html/allacademicanswers.com/wp-content/plugins/content-for-money/contentformoney.php on line 162
Charles e Whittaker
The duration that Charles Whittaker served in the judiciary has received harsh judgment with many historians considering it as a failure. They have considered the contribution, or lack of it, in several cases that Whittaker was involved in to be lacking. In Baker v. Carr Whittaker did not participate in this important decision and the subsequent rights that followed further masked his contribution in the court (Smith 176). The case before the court was about legislative reapportionment. Charles e Whittaker.
On a majority vote, 5-4, the court ruled that a search by health workers do not violate the Fourth amendment. The court argued that whenever a health worker shall have cause to suspect that a nuisance exist in any house, he may demand entry during the day time. Refusal of entry shall attract a fine of twenty dollars. The ruling in Camara v. Municipal Court eight years later overturned this decision. Whittaker again failed to portray his decisiveness in the common matters that affect the common citizens. No wonder most people consider him as one of the worst judges appointed to the Supreme Court in the twentieth century. Charles e Whittaker.
BAKER v. CARR, 369 U.S. 186 (1962). 369 U.S. 186
Camara v. Municipal Court 387 U.S. 523 (1967)
Frank v. Maryland, 359 U.S. 360 (1959)
Garrow, David. Mental decrepitude on the U.S. Supreme Court: The historical case for a 28th Amendment. The University of Chicago Law review, vol.67, No.4 (autumn, 2000), pp 995-1087.
NLRB v. Truck Drivers Local 449 (“Buffalo Linen Supply Co.”), 353 U.S. 87 (1957)
Smith, Craig. Failing justice: Charles Evans Whittaker on the Supreme Court. New York: McFarland.2005. Print.