Minimum Drinking Age Case Study

While listening to the Oral argument, I found all of the Supreme Court justices interesting but David H. Souter really challenged the States attorney on her defense. Rebecca T. Partington argued that the State ban was put in place to control temperance and reasonable control in consumption of alcoholic beverages. In my opinion, I thought Justice Davis H. Souter really challenged the attorney Partington defense and clearly pointed out that her argument didn’t support how the ban was supported by the Twenty First

In this article “Minimum Drinking Age: Should the minimum drinking age in the United States remain 21?” the author describes both sides of the argument with lots of evidence and facts to back up both sides. Just before that the article states some background information about the topic and what it was like in the 1970 - 2000. He says that before 1970 the Legal Drinking Age was lower than 21 but got changed because of an outcry of people complaining of a lot of drunk driving accidents. The first stars starting changing their laws in 1975. Ever since that date it has been a debate whether it should’ve changed back or not. The author then goes into the first argument. The first argument was what the supporters argue: what supporters say. The author

In 1984 Ronald Reagan proposed a new law that declared that the legal drinking age must raised up to 21 instead of the age of 18. The law was forced upon the states by threatening them by stating that the government will reduce their highway funding until the states passed the law. Of course all the states eventually change their legal drinking age to 21. Some critics believe that this law’s results have been very successful, however the law possesses many insecurities, but certain programs can be arranged to help educate teenagers on alcohol.

In 1984, the American government raised the minimum national drinking age from 18 to 21 as a method to reduce the number of car crashes and deaths caused by underage drunk drivers. The government placed the minimum drinking age law in the Federal Aid Highway Act, and by doing that states were not technically required to keep their minimum drinking age at 21. Given the fact that the law was a part of the Highway Act, if a state wanted to establish a different minimum drinking age, they would be required to surrender ten percent of their highway funds (Messamore). In 1987, after the act was passed, South Dakota challenged the law by changing their minimum drinking age to 19 and were brought to court in the case South Dakota vs. Dole. The court used the 27th amendment, which limits government spending power, to achieve their federal objectives. In a 7-2 decision, it was decided that Congress was able to use financial penalties on states that did not comply with the law (South Dakota v. Dole). Different federal, state and local laws help to decide alcohol 's "role" in our country. The different governments worked together to decide what laws would be put in place regarding manufacturing alcohol, selling alcohol, who can drink, and any responses to alcohol-related problems (Alcohol Policy). The brain is not fully developed until age 25 and alcohol can affect the hippocampus, a part of the brain that plays an important role in the formation of new memories. Several people may

The government is conducting an idea to whether lower the minimum legal drinking age in the United States or not. Many Americans forbid the idea of legalizing the drinking age so that it would be profitable to the businesses. Likewise, there have been many advantages and disadvantages of why should the government allow young adults drink under the age of 21. To prevent this issue, many Americans have provided reasoning that will support the idea of keeping the minimum legal drinking age where it is now. The government should maintain the minimum legal drinking age in the United States at the age of 21.

Technically, the National Minimum Drinking Age Act didn’t force the states to conform to a federal uniform minimum drinking age. Instead of overstepping the boundaries of states right by simply making a federal law that outlaws anyone under 21

Once a person reaches the age of 18, they are allowed to tattoo their bodies, smoke tobacco, gamble and even enlist if they wanted to! As an adult, they want to be treated as one but how can they feel like an adult if hanging around with their friends and drinking beer while watching TV is illegal? Of course, that does not stop them, though. The United States is one of the few countries in which still have such a high minimum drinking age. Although most people think young adults (18-year olds) are irresponsible, the minimum drinking age should be lowered to 18 because they deserve to be recognized as adults in order to avoid illegal, uncontrolled drinking and other illegal actions.

I. Introduction: Starting in 1970 21 states reduced the minimum drinking age to 18. Another 8 reduced it to 19 or 20. However, these states noticed increases in alcohol-related fatalities among teenagers and young adults. As a result, of the 29 states that had lowered their drinking age, 24 raised the age again between 1976 and 1984. By 1984, only three states allowed 18-year-olds to drink all types of alcoholic liquor. The enactment of the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 prompted states to raise their legal age for purchase or public possession of alcohol to 21 or risk losing millions in federal highway funds. The states who raised it were given highway funding by the

In 1984, the United States’ federal government passed the National Minimum Drinking Age Act. Under this Act, the federal government gives highway funds to States that forbid people under the age of twenty-one years old from “purchasing or publicly possessing alcoholic beverages”(23 U.S.C. § 158). The incentive created a sense of a standardized minimum drinking age despite the fact that legally there cannot be a federal minimum drinking age. Even though this Act has been in effect for decades, there are many debates on whether or not the age should be changed. The minimum legal drinking age should stay the same because it prevents a large number of drinking and driving accidents; it reduces overall alcohol consumption; and it has very horrible health effects on youth.

In the 1980s, the United States raised the Minimum Legal Drinking Age (MLDA) to 21, from 18, in an attempt to protect the nation 's youth. This placed the USA among the few countries whose drinking age is above 18. These countries include most of Canada, the Republic of Korea, Nicaragua, Iceland, Japan, Norway, Sweden, Egypt, Indonesia, Micronesia, and Palau (Jernigan). Around the world, drinking ages vary; for example, in Slovenia, Italy, Portugal, Malta and Greece, you can drink before you turn 18, and in parts of India, you cannot legally obtain alcohol until age 25 (Jernigan; Mukherjee). This leads to an important question on whether our democracy should lower the MLDA. The facts on underage drinking, international data on lower drinking ages, current enforcement of underage drinking laws, as well as proposed implications of programs coupled with a lower drinking age provides provoking data pointing towards the ethical lowering of the drinking age. The democracy of the United States of America should lower the MLDA, but also adopt a mandatory alcohol education class, and a graduated licensing system.

As Americans, we are always wondering what we can do to save lives. We suspect cancer, disease, suicide, violence, and distracted driving as taking the lives of our fellow Americans. What you may not know, is that we are already saving lives, and we have been since 1984 because of one simple law. The Uniform Drinking Age Act of 1984 moved the minimum legal drinking age from 18 to 21. Lowering the drinking age is a step backward for our safety and our health. This claim is viable because more young people will die if the drinking age is lowered, lowering the drinking age will not cause people to drink more safely, and a lower drinking age negatively affects people later in life.

“What we’re doing now to prevent underage drinking isn’t working; it’s time to try something else.” Although many people argue that the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1964, which lowed the drinking age from eighteen to twenty one, was a good idea. David J Hanson a professor in the State University of New York believed that something needs to be done to make the United States a safer place to live. Is it fair that people in the United States can serve in the military, vote in elections, serve in juries, get married, and enter into legal contracts at the age of eighteen, but not buy alcohol until they are twenty one years of age. Lowering the drinking age in the United States to eighteen will help young adults be more responsible, and

On July 1, 1971 the 26th amendment was passed which lowered the minimum age to vote from twenty one to eighteen years old. Shortly after the amendment was passed twenty nine states across America started lowering the drinking age from 21 to either 18,19, or 20 years old. This new freedom for young adults only lasted for a brief time by 1984 the Uniform Drinking Age Act was passed. The Uniform Drinking Age Act forced states to change the drinking age back to twenty one years old; by reducing the federal transportation funding, for each state that did not have a minimum drinking age of21. This act has caused controversy for years, there even is group of 136 college presidents called Amethyst Initiative that support a lower minimum legal

The case to lower the minimum drinking age in Wisconsin, the self-proclaimed beer capital of the world, is emerging despite the majority of people who oppose it. Both the Republican and Democratic parties contain majority’s who oppose lowering the drinking age, yet conservatives are the least supportive when compared to liberals. The biggest opponent is the group that initiated the age increase years ago, Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD). On the other hand, people who tend to support lowering the drinking age, are regular drinkers and people who have a higher education, more specially obtain a postgraduate degree. Also, contrary to popular conception, younger adults are no more likely to support lowering the drinking age than older adults. The argument is critical because of what is at stake, lives and more uniquely, young lives. Therefore, the conversation of the minimum drinking age will not cease any time soon as the safety of the nation is paramount and directly influenced by the passage of drinking

The legal drinking age is the age at which a person can consume or purchase alcohol. These laws cover a wide range of issues and behaviors, addressing when and where alcohol can be consumed. The National Minimum Drinking Age Act was passed by Congress 30 years ago. This law told states that they had to enforce the drinking age of 21 or lose up to ten percent of their federal highway funding. The idea that a person was fully an adult at age 21 relates to an English common law. 21 was the age where a person could vote and become a knight. If a person was 21, they could drink then, too. Franklin Roosevelt approved lowering the minimum age for the military draft from 21 to 18 during World War II. Organizations like Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) began pushing for the national drinking age to be set at 21. They thought it would keep alcohol out of the hands of 18-year-olds who they felt were less mature. As a result, President Reagan signed the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 to set the age at 21. Legislation concerning the legal minimum drinking age in the United States can be