“The law is more than a simple set of principles” says the professor in the film Talk of the City. This is a valid point that supports the legal connotations of my case and raises another rather provocative question. Can you simply ban a member of society from using your restaurant simply because of the color of their skin, without even a polite greeting? You might think that this is possible since the owner has complete control of the home and actually pays the bills to avoid foreclosure on the structure. But isn't it written in the Constitution of our founding fathers that we, both as citizens and as human beings, have the general right to enjoy a harmless lunch at a local restaurant, without being bothered by the owner at the expense of the students? When is a thin line drawn in concrete that divides impartial law from partisan law? These are persistent questions that we face every day, and in the 1960s they were an urgent and significant issue when the issue of race came into play. The professor allegedly claimed that it would be unreasonable to evict the students involved in the William Mack Bell trial from the premises, but in reality the affable thing to do is to repeal the alleged Maryland law entitled “Robert Mack Bell v. Maryland” “Any person or persons who enter or pass through the land, premises or private property of any person or persons in this State after having been duly advised by the owner or his agent not to do so, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor” . such a law can simply be abandoned since it has been set in stone and is a law customarily practiced and well known among white men in the state of Maryland and perhaps in other states during the time... middle of paper... . ..h there, esteemed authority, to demonstrate a position of solid ground for the justice of a man in the wrong place at the wrong time, justice will hold a pristine eagle for the people. Is it possible to juxtapose a written document with a spoken one? As for me, I'm skeptical about this idea and I think Leopold would be on the same page as me. Seeing as he is a man who is an advocate for strengthening justice in the bodies of judicial systems and ending corrupt politics. I think there has to be a fine line between written and spoken document, Democrat and Republican, conservative and liberal, black and white. All these are simply titles, a name, a reputation to be maintained with great generosity. But when the final gavel falls on the bench of the justice system, a leader will refute the action and, in a sense, the people will be well represented..