- April 1, 2012
- Posted by: essay
- Category: Sample essay papers
Historically, the sovereignty of people was one of the primary concerns of the US democracy. The founding fathers attempted to provide people and states with wide autonomy to maintain their power to self-governance within the US. At the same time, the US Constitution has always been and always will be the main document on the ground of which local legislation and policies are developed. In this respect, it should be said that the case of fiscal policies conducted by the state of Confusion, which actually provoked Tania’s lawsuit, should be tested in regard to whether they meet the US Constitution or not. At this point, it is necessary to remember about supremacy of the US Constitution over the local legislation and about the subordination of the local and state legislation to federal norms and rules. On the other hand, Tania needs to file a lawsuit and win the trial in the court to force Confusion’s authorities and legislators to change their fiscal policies which affect her business.
First of all, it is important to lay emphasis on the fact that Tania files a lawsuit because the statute introduced by the state of Confusion limits her business opportunities and increases her expenses. Naturally, Tania attempts to minimize her expenses and the lawsuit can help her to tackle this problem. However, to win a lawsuit and to force the state to change its policy may take a long time because Tania has to file a lawsuit to the lowest level of state courts first, namely to the county court, where her case will be tried and the decision will be taken. In fact, it is a general procedure of filing a lawsuit in which citizens should file a lawsuit of the lowest level. If Tania is not satisfied with the court’s ruling, she can appeal to the Supreme Court of the state of Confusion. The next step may be the federal level up to the Supreme Court of the US, if either party is not satisfied with the court decision.
At the same time, Tania should start filing the lawsuit from the demand letter, where she outlines her claims and harm suffered. At this stage, it is possible to settle the case on the condition that the state of Confusion’s authorities settle the case and take the decision that Tania can agree with. In such a way, she may not proceed filing the lawsuit because the case can be settled. If the parties do not reach settlement, Tania should file a complaint, where Tania should explain her legal claims against the defendant. The complaint is filed to the court. In such a way, the lawsuit begins and the case undergoes the trial in the result of which the court takes a decision concerning the complaint of the claimant.
On analyzing Tania’s case, it is worth mentioning the fact that she may file a lawsuit because her business activities are affected by the state of Confusion’s statute. However, the state of Confusion as well as any other state of the US has all the rights and liberties which are not limited by the US Constitution and which do not contradict to the US Constitution. To put it more precisely, according to Article 4 of the US Constitution:
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof (Article 4, Section 1).
In such a way, the US Constitution grants states with large autonomy concerning their policies and they can define their policies respectively to their needs. Moreover, Amendment 10 enhances and complements provisions of the Article 4:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people (Amendment 10)
In such a way, the state of Confusion cannot exercise power which is not delegated to the state by the US Constitution. At this point the court may take into consideration the fact that the statute of the state of Confusion affects citizens of the US and its norms surpass jurisdiction of the state of Confusion because people from any state of the US have to increase their expenses under the statute implemented by the state of Confusion. Therefore, the court can take a decision that meets the demands of Tania.
However, the win of Tania is uncertain because the court can take a decision either in favor of Tania’s demands or in favor of the state of Confusion’s policies. In fact, Tania demands are justified by the aforementioned expansion of jurisdiction of the state of Confusion. On the other hand, the state of Confusion still has the right to define fiscal policies within its jurisdiction. Therefore, the court can take any of the two possible decisions.