•address the following in 800–1,000 words:



Read and brief the following cases with regard to prisoners’ rights:


  • Wolff v. McDonnell
  • Procunier v. Martinez
  • Estelle v. Gamble
  • Bell v. Wolfish
  • Your case briefs should follow this format:
    • Title: Title of the selected case
    • Facts: Summary of the events, court timeline, evidence, and so forth
    • Issues: Issues that were present in this case
    • Decisions: The court’s decision and the conclusion to the case
    • Reasoning: The rationale behind the final decision
    • Dissenting opinions: Any dissenting opinions, and an explanation of what they were and why they were raised
  • Compile your case briefs into a comprehensive document, and submit it to your instructor.




This is an example of what the instructor is wanting us to do and I need at least four schlor sources, APA format.

Case: Roe v. Wade (1973)


Facts: A woman was denied an abortion by a doctor afraid to violate a Texas criminal statute prohibiting abortions except “for the purpose of saving the life of the mother.” The Federal District Court ruled the statute unconstitutional; there was a direct appeal by Texas to the U.S. Supreme Court.


Issue: Does the Texas statute violate a constitutional right to have an abortion?


Decesion: (Vote: 7-2) Yes: The statute is unconstitutional because the constitution contains a right to an abortion.


Reasoning: (Justice Blackmun)

The State of Texas asserts it’s rule (a law banning all abortions) is furthered by 2 interests: (1) Protecting prenatal life and (2) the medical safety of woman. The court accepts these interests, but rejects Texas’s absolute rule because:

Here Texas’s law violates this framework, because it outlaws abortions not just in the third trimester, but also in the first and second trimesters of pregnancy.


Dissent 1: Rehnquist (joined by White):

A. “Liberty” not found in the Bill of Rights is not absolutely protected because RULE: the correct test for social and economic regulation is whether the law has “rational relation to a valid state objective.”

B. The majority ignores that rule. The trimester scheme is “judicial legislation” and historical legal prohibitions show abortion is “not so rooted in the traditions and conscience of our people as to be ranked fundamental” because the drafters of the 14th Amendment did not intend to limit the states’ ability to regulate abortion.


Your case briefs should follow this format:






Dissenting opinions: