Law

The paper shall address a specific issue or policy facing Criminal Justice Agencies today. Inclusion of scholarly research is required and the paper should be written in APA style. Agency selected: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention   The format of the paper shall be as follows: I.       Introduction:  Describe the agency you have selected, its functions and clientele served. I would suggest choosing and agency similar to one you would have chosen for your internship. II.      Identify a specific issue or policy unique to that agency, why it is important, how it has impacted the agency and the clientele it serves. III.    Specifically, address how the agency has addressed and managed the issue. Has it been successful, if not why? How would you address the issue?  Include scholarly research. IV.    Conclusion

Question: White House and Congress, and other politicians, are so preoccupied with winning elections that they have little or no time for governing.” This comment reflects the idea now popular among leading observers of political life in Washington-that elected officials are increasingly engaged in a “permanent campaign,” and that little or nothing of substance can get accomplished under these conditions. What are the characteristics and indicators of the “permanent campaign”? How does the permanent campaign impact on the functions of governing? Is the increased attentiveness to the public and constituencies good for American democracy? Why or Why not?

Drawing on the background materials, address the following prompts in a minimum of 250 words. 1.Why do minor political parties have such little success competing in U.S. elections?   2.Short of winning elections, how do third parties have influence on the political system? 3.Did independent candidate Kanye West had a significant impact on the 2020 election? 4.Would you ever consider voting for an independent or a third party candidate? Why or why not? Background Materials: 1.OpenStax American Government  (Links to an external site.) , Chapter 9 2.Maurice Duverger. “Factors in a Two-Party and Multiparty System  (Links to an external site.) .” (In Party Politics and Pressure Groups, 1972, pp. 23-32) 3.Stuart Rothenberg, “How third-party votes sunk Clinton, what they mean for Trump  (Links to an external site.) “. (Roll Call, July 2019) 4.Ed Kilgore, “Third Parties Unlikely to Wreak Havoc in 2020 Election  (Links to an external site.) ,” (Intelligencer, May 2020). 5.Barbara Sprunt, “Here’s How Republicans Are Boosting Kanye West’s Presidential Campaign  (Links to an external site.) .” (NPR, August 2020)

In this paper, you will choose a particular issue by and identify one state, one national, and one international policy OR one local, state and national policy focused on this issue.  Students provide critical analysis of these policies.I wanted something about criminal justices system or education system.. for state law it would be Florida lawNO ABSTRACT IS NEEDEDPaper format:Introductory paragraph:Discuss the problem/issue.Why is it important?Why should we care? What about the issue illicit social justice concerns?Body of the paper:Identify the state/national/international OR local/state/national policies of focus and provide critical analysis of HOW these impact populations. Are human rights being violated by the policy or does the policy attempt to protect rights?  Students will identify whether or not the policies respond to the unique vulnerabilities and needs of people impacted by the issue. Go beyond stating that they do or they do not respond – critical analysis must be evident in order to earn full points.Discuss why these particular policies were enacted at the time they were enacted – what was happening socially, politically, and economically? Conclusion:Provide a concluding paragraph(s).Summarize what you discussed and the impact of the issue.Describe your overall understanding of the issue and how you can possibly resolve the issue (i.e. What can be done about addressing the issue).Briefly address implications for society if the issue is (1) addressed and (2) not addressed.References and in-text citations should be in APA format. Three (3) legitimate references must be included (THIS MEANS PEER REVIEWEDREFERENCES). You may also include other sources to support your work.

What are the 3 things that the Trump and Clinton campaigns did well? Didn’t do well? Your analysis should include the strategic decisions both implemented to convey their messages.Use the following three articles to assist you in your research of this assignment:https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/11/mobilization-only-politics-2016-21445https://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/michigan-hillary-clinton-trump-232547https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/brandonfinnigan/why-trump-really-won-wisconsin-and-pennsylvania#.jx1yeYz0P

THINKING ABOUT COMPLEX CONCEPTS: In many court cases, the judge’s or jury’s task lies in categorizing someone’s actions. A jury might need to decide, for example, whether a defendant’s actions fall into the category of “sexual harassment.” (If the defendant was offensive in some way, but his actions don’t fit into the category of “harassment,” then he isn’t guilty of harassment.) Or, as a different example, a jury might be certain that the defendant caused someone’s death, but they still need to decide whether the crime should be categorized as “first-degree murder” or “second-degree,” a categorization with large implications for the likely punishment. To help with this categorization, laws define each crime in precise terms, so that there is a careful definition of “robbery,” a clear definition of “trespassing” or “first-degree murder,” and so on. Even with these definitions, though, the courts regularly encounter ambiguous cases, raising questions about whether the person’s actions satisfy the definition of the crime the person is charged with. At the least, this reminds us how difficult it is to find satisfactory, broadly useful definitions for concepts, a point that is made by the different models of concept formation to explain people’s thinking. In addition, we need to ask: How do the courts proceed when they encounter one of these ambiguous cases? We’ve seen that people have prototypes in mind for their various concepts, and so, in day to day life, they often assess a new case by asking how closely it resembles that prototype. It turns out that, in the courts, jurors do the same in making legal judgments, and so they’re more likely to convict someone if the trial facts fit with their prototype for the crime—if the facts fit the jurors’ notion of, say, a “typical bank robbery” or a “typical hit and run violation.” Put differently, a “typical” crime with weak evidence is more likely to lead to a conviction than an unusual crime with similarly weak evidence. Of course, this is legally nonsensical: Jury decisions should depend on the quantity and quality of the evidence, and on the legal definition of the crime. The jurors’ ideas about what’s typical for that crime should play no role at all—especially when we acknowledge that these ideas are shaped more by TV crime shows than by actual crime statistics. Nonetheless, the prototypes do influence the jury, and so legal judgments (like concept use in general) are plainly shaped by typicality. In addition, we’ve seen that concept users often seem to have a “theory” in mind about why a concept is as it is, and they use the theory in reasoning about the concept. If you saw someone jumping into a pool fully clothed, you’re likely to categorize this person as a “drunk,” not because the person fits your definition for being drunk or even fits your prototype, but because you have a set of beliefs about how drunks are likely to act. Based on those beliefs (i.e., based on your “theory”), you decide that drunkenness is the most plausible explanation for the behavior you just observed, and you categorize accordingly. Similar categorization strategies are evident in the courtroom. For example, consider the crime of stalking. This crime is difficult to define in a crisp way; in fact, it is defined in different ways in different states. Often, though, the definition includes the notion that the stalker intended to force some sort of relationship with the victim—perhaps a relationship involving intimacy or a relationship in which the victim feels fear. It’s often the case, however, that there’s no direct evidence of this intention, so the jury needs to infer the intention from the defendant’s behaviors, or from the context. In making these inferences, juries rely on their “theory” of stalking—their beliefs about how and why one individual might stalk another. This helps us understand why juries are more likely to convict someone of stalking if (for example) the defendant was a former intimate of the person being “stalked.” Apparently, jurors are guided by their ideas about how former (but now rejected) lovers behave—even if these ideas have nothing to do with the legal definition of stalking. How should we think about these points? On one hand, we want jurors to be guided by the law, and not by their (perhaps idiosyncratic, perhaps uninformed) intuitions about the crime at issue in a trial. On the other hand, the U.S. criminal justice system relies on the good sense and good judgment of juries—so plainly we want jurors to use their judgment. How best to balance these points isn’t clear, but the tension between these points is perhaps inevitable, given what we know about how concepts are represented and how humans categorize knowledge about concepts. Question Promts Instructions: Complete and then submit the answers to the questions below in approximately 250 -300 words (total for all questions). How would you define ‘justice’? Why is it difficult to define. Why are definitions in general an inadequate way to describe how we reason using concepts and categories? Based on the article on DNA analysis and the ideas presented here, discuss three reasons why legal judgments are difficult to make and susceptible to thinking heuristics. How might stereotypes factor into all this? Critical Thinking Exercise rubric Critical Thinking Exercise rubric Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Reflection 7.0 pts Clear, cogent and thoughtful response and study proposal. 6.0 pts Thoughtful response, could be improved in clarity/depth, or study proposal missing keyword descriptions 5.0 pts Somewhat superficial response; missing one-odd aspect of reflection or study description is missing keywords descriptions 4.0 pts Superficial response; or study description missing keyword descriptions 3.0 pts Superficial response, no study described 7.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Participation 3.0 pts On time 2.0 pts One day late 1.0 pts Two days late 0.0 pts No Marks 3.0 pts Total Points: 10.0

I would like to research anything related to Covid-19 because I work in the hospital as an Emergency Technician in ER. I can easily relate or revise anything that’s why I picked this topic. Write a 1.5-2 page issue proposal (double-spaced) about the issue that you will be exploring in your research paper. The title of the paper should name the topic and the type of essay you will be writing. (Example: “Legend of Zelda: Video Game Analysis” or “Death Penalty: Argumentative Essay” or “Meditation: Concept Essay.”) Instructions: Paragraph #1: Introduce the issue, offering context and general information. End the introduction with the research question or questions you are interested in exploring. (The research process must always start with a question.)  Paragraph #2: Explain why it is compelling to you. Paragraph #3: Describe what you already know about it. Paragraph #4: Explain what more you need to learn and how you will begin to find the information. Be specific. For example, mention the types of key word searches you will use, the specific places you will seek information. (“Library databases” is too broad. Which databases will you search?)

In a minimum 5 page paper, react to the article provided.   Think about: are there problems with the laws surrounding sexual assault and rape, and if so, what are they?   Do experts share your opinion, or have differing views, and why do you think they are right/wrong?    What are the historic underpinnings of these laws that have led to the laws we have today? What would be some valuable changes, if any? Why?    You don’t have to answer any or all of these questions.  This is a reaction paper, so you can take the paper in the direction you believe is appropriate.  But you do need to structure a paper so that your argument relies on some research, and you must quote or paraphrase authorities to advance your argument.  You should cite to at least five authoritative sources.      Five pages means times new Roman, 12 point font, double spacing (not double-double spacing), one inch margins.   You should not need any subheadings for this paper.   You can use a title page if you want, but on a separate sheet that does not count for your five pages.   Five pages means that the writing starts at the top of the margin, and ends at the bottom, and the last page is at least 3/4 completed.   You should include page numbers.    Authoritative sources mean scholars, politicians, think tanks, law review articles, and well-known thinkers.   Usually these will come from well-known magazines, newspapers, or scholarly sources.  Check the background of your sources.   A random person’s anecdotal experience published on Medium is not sufficient.  (You could use someone’s experience to illustrate your points if you want but they will not count towards your five source requirement).  Content aggregators are not scholarly sources.  The article I gave you does not count as a source.   Your paper must be well-organized, coherent, and proof-read.   All work must be your own.   When you cite to a source, you must attribute a direct quotation by marking it with quotation marks and immediately using a citation; or  attribute a paraphrase by immediately using a citation after the paraphrased material.  I do not care about the citation method, but merely putting a works cited list at the end without any end notes/foot notes/parenthetical citations in the body of the paper is not just unacceptable, it is plagiarism.  You may receive a 0 or other sanctions if you plagiarize.   When you quote, you should not use block quotes unless absolutely necessary.   You should try to limit the quotations to the shortest amount of material possible while still providing context.   It is always better to integrate a quotation into a sentence that is partially your own thought, and partially quoted material.    Finally, do not simply put in a quote and expect me to understand why it is there.  That is not good writing.  Your paper must provide enough context  for me to understand why you chose to quote someone else’s words.   Papers must be turned in on time using turn it in.  No late papers will be accepted absent extenuating circumstances.     You have two months to complete this assignment.  Please do not put it off until the last minute.  I will be happy to discuss drafts, or even review drafts, until November 11.    Grading: Five quality sources, used appropriately: 50 points Writing, organizing, arguing, proof reading: 40 points Formatting, length: 10 points

Prepare and submit an essay of 500 to 800 words (with a typical font and double spacing, this will be between 2 and 3 pages). Your assignment should be submitted as a Microsoft Word document. (If you cannot submit your file in in Word, please discuss other options with your mentor before submitting your first assignment.) Your essay should answer all the following questions. Be sure your answer is complete and that your writing is organized, clear, and grammatically correct. Properly cite any outside sources of information, including your textbook, in proper APA style. This is a midterm paper that will help you in preparing for your final project. In this paper you will also have an opportunity to give insights into the deliberative civil processes in the United States from your own perspective. Prepare a draft proposal for a particular individual engagement, for you as a citizen, in the process of democratic deliberation. The overall goal of your proposed action should be to allow you to become a more involved and responsible citizen; the engagement should have national or global importance. Choose a single issue-area that is, in your opinion, important for you as a citizen (for example, health care; education; veterans’ affairs; gender-based discourse; issues related to disabilities, etc.) Keep narrowing your focus until you can list one or two important question(s) you would like to tackle during your own engaged civic action. Identify any possible stakeholders (institutional actors) that are active in that particular field, and tell why you chose them. Identify institutional or other challenges to the action you suggest. Explain your choices and any ways you might propose to meet these challenges.

Discuss a sport law case and how it did or will effect sport