Introducing 

Prezi AI.

Your new presentation assistant.

Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.

Loading…
Transcript

Quote from Dissent

Work Cited

Holding of the Court

  • "DeShaney v. Winnebago County | The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law." The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law | A Multimedia Archive of the Supreme Court of the United States. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 Dec. 2012. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1988/1988_87_154#sort=vote>.
  • JACOBS, TOM. "10 Supreme Court Cases Every Teen Should Know." The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 Dec. 2012. <http://www.nytimes.com/learning/teachers/featured
  • "Estelle v. Gamble." LII | LII / Legal Information Institute. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 Dec. 2012. <http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics
  • http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-sxXqMl0rN5Q/T-xaPxKuM8I/AAAAAAAAAmg/k3MX0mDIOF0/s1600/brass_scales_of_justice_off_balance_symbolizing_injustice.jpg
  • http://lh5.ggpht.com/-6BTfSaD_jPU/S5_pK8UGxDI/AAAAAAAADSc/_VtFNIv_8FI/4-year-old%252520Joshua%252520Deshaney.jpg
  • http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7a/US-CourtOfAppeals-7thCircuit-Seal.png/250px-US-CourtOfAppeals-7thCircuit-Seal.png
  • http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f3/Seal_of_the_United_States_Supreme_Court.svg/180px-Seal_of_the_United_States_Supreme_Court.svg.png
  • http://www.ioc.state.il.us/comptroller/cache/file/00F085EA-88A7-49B4-B09BD35136F080B2_medium.png
  • "Daniels v. Williams | Casebriefs." Law Cases & Case Briefs for Students. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Dec. 2012. <http://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/constitutional-law/constitutional-law-keyed-to-cohen/defining-the-scope-of-liberty-and-property-protected-by-the-due-process-clause-the-procedural-due-process-cases/daniels-v-williams-2/>.
  • "Estelle v. Gamble." LII | LII / Legal Information Institute. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Dec. 2012. <http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0429_0097_ZO.html>.
  • "DeShaney v. Winnebago County - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Dec. 2012. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeShaney_v._Winnebago_County#C

Justices involved: William Rehnquist (Chief Justice), Byron White, John P. Stevens, Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, William J. Brennan Jr., Thurgood Marshall, and Harry Blackmun.

3

6

Quote from Majority

What was the courts question?

Whether or not the government is required under the Constitution to protect children.

  • Although all states assume this responsibility through child protection laws.

What courts did this case go through?

  • District Court for the

Eastern District of Wisconsin

  • Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals
  • Supreme Court of the United States

DeShaney v. Winnebago

Facts About Case

Amendment Involved

Joshua DeShaney lived with his father who physically abused him after gaining custody in a divorce court in Wyoming. Soon the Department of Social Services took Joshua away but later gave custody back to his father. Because Randy DeShaney entered the agreement with the Department of Social Services and five check-ins were made by a DSS social worker in the year of 1983 to check for any suspicion of child abuse. Although there was recorded suspicion of child abuse in the DeShaney home, no action was taken. Even though a Hospital reported suspicions of child abuse to the DSS still no action was taken. The father abused Joshua once more and left him permanently paralyzed and mentally disabled. Joshua's mother sued the Department of Social Services for returning him to his father after being taken away the first time.

By: Alexandria Urban

Respondent:

Briefing the Case

Petitioner:

Winnebago County Social Services

Four-year-old Joshua DeShaney

Agenda/Purpose

  • Briefing the case
  • What courts did this case go through?
  • Explaining the Holding
  • Majority & Dissenting Opinions
  • What were the precedent cases?
  • Essential Question/Enduring Understanding

The Fourteenth Amendment, which forbids the state from depriving "any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

DeShaney v. Winnebago County Social Services (1989)

Questions/Comments?

Thank you all for coming.

Majority and Dissent

Yay:

Rahnquist

White

Stevens

Scalia

O'Connor

Kennedy

Nay:

Brennan

Marshall

Blackmun

Essential Question/Enduring Understanding

At its heart every great legal conflict is a clash over values.

What are my rights and responsibilities?

Clash of Values

Legality v. Morals

The social services had a moral responsibility to take Joshua away from his father it was morally wrong to leave Joshua with his father even after there was suspicion of abuse.

Quote from Dissent

Quote from Majority

Precedent case

Estelle v. Gamble

Daniels v. Williams

Gamble, was an inmate of the Texas Department of Corrections, and was injured on November of 1973, while performing a prison work assignment. This involved whether or not inmates have rights to medical treatment in all correctional facilities. This case established for the first time that prison and jail inmates have a constitutional right to medical treatment under the Eighth Amendment.

Daniels allegedly slipped on a pillow that was left on the stairs of the Richmond City Jail by Williams. (A Government Official) It was decided in this case that negligence by a government official does not give rise to a deprivation of life, liberty or property protected by the Due Process Clause.

"Poor Joshua! Victim of repeated attacks by an irresponsible, bullying, cowardly, and intemperate father, and abandoned by respondents who placed him in a dangerous predicament and who knew or learned what was going on, and yet did essentially nothing except, as the Court revealingly observes... It is a sad commentary upon American life... that this child, Joshua DeShaney, now is assigned to live out the remainder of his life profoundly retarded. Joshua and his mother, as petitioners here, deserve - but now are denied by this Court - the opportunity to have the facts of their case considered in the light of the constitutional protection that 42 U.S.C. 1983 is meant to provide."

Learn more about creating dynamic, engaging presentations with Prezi