International Justice

Before 1946, the first court was called the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ), which was established in 1922 under Article XIV of the Covenant of the League of Nations

until 1940, when Germany invaded the Netherlands and things were not working out very as good as before (Black, 2003). The nations that felt the council could help them were few and far between, not enough to keep it going strong. Not everyone was happy with the court decisions and used it less and less to solve problems. The World Court learned from the problems before and worked to make it better for every country as best it could. They help solve problems with nations pertaining to crimes that were violent in other countries that agreed to the method of the court. In the time it was active it solved a lot of cases that help shape the future of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 1946. Once the invasion happen it was difficult to handle any disputes between

nations and it just simmered until the court gave up. The Permanent Court was dissolved in 1946 and the International Court of Justice or World Court begun.

Having an issue with a business or individual is not a place for the World Court to handle. They only deal with countries that have disputes and they have to agree on taking it to court. Anyone can bring a case as long as they are members under the United Nations and are statue of the Court in that party (Moffitt & Neuhausen, n.d.). They would come together and debate the issue at hand and the panel of judges will hear the case and decide the judgment and that decision would be final. As with a US court if you have a dispute it depends on the level in which court to choose to handle the problem. A judge will handle the case and decide the outcome of the case and depending on the statue it can be taken to a higher court. A federal court judges by the second amendment of the constitution as the right to bear arms. The Supreme Court decided that Illinois did not violate this statue in the case of Presser who had the right of having arms to bear but the manner in

which he was forbidden to "associate together as a military organization or drill or parade with arms" (Presser v Illinois 1999). The state of Illinois was against anyone carrying a weapons and how they handle the use of said weapon. Presser claims it was to protect not to try to start a war or gathering an army.

The United States higher courts like Federal Courts doesn't give advice or opinions on cases but some state courts do as well as International Court do very often (USLegal. n.d.) The advisory opinion is not a bond it is more of opinions given by the committee in which you bring forth an issue that needs to be resolved. Going to court is sometimes a little over the top when a group of individual can come together and discuss a situation and try to resolve it. The advice is guidance of what is right by knowing