Sentences with phrase «as constitutional in»

Random drug testing for athletic activities was upheld in Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton, and a mandatory extra-curricular drug testing program was upheld as constitutional in Board of Education of Pottawatomie County, Okla. v. Earls.

Not exact matches

Named after the 13th constitutional amendment, which abolished slavery except as «punishment for crime,» the doc uses archival footage and expert commentary to make the case that slavery hasn't disappeared from the U.S. — it's evolved into our modern system of mass incarceration, one in which many prisons are run by for - profit companies and prisoners can be paid a pittance to work for corporations.

The 13th constitutional amendment was ratified in 1865 and stated: «Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.»

Spain's IBEX remained under pressure as a constitutional crisis grows in the country.

Indeed, the courts are more likely to focus on whether there is «an adequate factual basis for singling out these specific countries as distinct sources of risk,» Richard Pildes, a professor of Constitutional Law at New York University, told Business Insider in an email.

In December, the Yukon appeal court sided with the Ross River Dena Council that existing free - entry staking rules conflicted with the constitutional duty to consult aboriginal groups with outstanding land claims, in this case to an area known as the KaskIn December, the Yukon appeal court sided with the Ross River Dena Council that existing free - entry staking rules conflicted with the constitutional duty to consult aboriginal groups with outstanding land claims, in this case to an area known as the Kaskin this case to an area known as the Kaska.

Litigation over the order will likely continue until the government provides «an adequate factual basis for singling out these specific countries as distinct sources of risk,» Richard Pildes, a professor of Constitutional Law at New York University, told Business Insider in an email.

The law, known as Senate Bill 4, is slated to take effect Sept. 1, but has been challenged in court by rights organizations and localities that say the law infringes on local governments» constitutional rights, and will sow fear through immigrant communities by dissuading people from reporting crimes or testifying as witnesses out of fear they will be deported.

As seen repeatedly, constitutional, democratic institutions in the Middle East are vulnerable to sectarian and authoritarian pressures, especially if championed from outside.

According to Stephen Scott, a constitutional law professor at McGill University, the original point of the law was to ensure courts in colonial America had the same traditional powers as those in England.

Louis Seidman, a constitutional - law expert and professor at the Georgetown University Law Center, told Business Insider in July that whether Trump can pardon himself is «very questionable» as «a matter of constitutional morality.»

The Supreme Court has ruled that the use of race in college admissions is constitutional, so long as explicit «quotas» aren't used.

«Whether Canada ends up as one national government or two national governments or several national governments, or some other kind of arrangement is, quite frankly, secondary in my opinion,» said Harper, who was at the time constitutional affairs critic for Reform.

In addition to skepticism about climate change per se, Republican opposition to the Paris Agreement included both economic reasons (such as that the Paris agreement would hurt domestic U.S. energy producers and manufacturers) and constitutional ones (such as that Obama should have sought Senate approval before signing the Paris Agreement).

Opinion: As a matter of constitutional jurisdiction, the federal government does not need Alberta's buy - in to legally enact and implement its national climate change policy

Macron's enthusiastic persona and his image as a «winner» — having been elected with a 66 percent majority, followed by a landslide victory in parliamentary elections giving him full constitutional powers — has charmed and impressed Donald Trump.

Notably, seven provinces opposed to the legislation, which, «in its drafting, if not in its intent, had serious and, in the view of the vast majority of witnesses, fatal flaws as to the constitutional violation of sections 92 and 91 of the British North America Act, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, freedom of speech, expression and association as protected by that very Charter of Rights and Freedoms,» Segal said.

Since his last re-election, Clarke has openly supported Republican causes on local and national right - wing media outlets; proudly trumpets on official Milwaukee County letterhead his 2013 award from the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, whose leader suggested using women and children as human shields during Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy's standoff with federal agents; accused Milwaukee County Executive Chris Abele of having «penis envy» and being on heroin when crafting the county budget and needing to be drug tested; blasted Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm and Chief Judge Jeffrey Kremers for being «soft on crime»; provided minimal protection for President Obama during his 2012 visit; employs former Scott Walker spokeswoman Fran McLaughlin, who was given criminal immunity over her role in Walker's mixing of campaign and county business; and created pro-gun public service announcements.

In the landmark 1969 Supreme Court case Tinker v. Des Moines, the court decided that there were limits to students» rights at school, but that «It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate,» as Justice Abe Fortas wrote.

«As with many constitutional issues, the devil is going to be in the details and how it's implemented and enforced.»

The success of the concurrent delegations was an excellent example of how Canada can capitalize on some of its constitutional similarities with India — in this case, the devolution of power over issues such as education and national - resource management to the provinces — in order to improve relations for Canada as a whole.

That includes the equalization program, placed in the constitution in 1982 (though, as a now decade - old paper on the matter pointed out, its constitutional status is actually quite weak).

The legal bottom line: As a matter of constitutional jurisdiction, the federal government does not need Alberta's buy - in to legally enact and implement its national climate change policy.

As a matter of constitutional law, the federal government has ample authority in this area.

As a federal court stated in a 2011 decision upholding the foreign national prohibition statute and regulation — a decision affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court: «It is fundamental to the definition of our national political community that foreign citizens do not have a constitutional right to participate in, and thus may be excluded from, activities of democratic self - government.»

Should our society's dialogue about values proceed in the context of the Constitution, and more particularly, in the arena of constitutional litigation with primacy given to the courts as moral tutors?

This would certainly seem to be effective to confer an immunity on the listed parties for losses that are incurred in the province; but what if a party outside the province suffers losses (see Reference re Upper Churchill Water Rights Reversion Act, [1984] 1 SCR 297, 1984 CanLII 17 (SCC)-RRB-, or what if the exercise of authority under the Act rests upon a reckless understanding as to the constitutional underpinnings of a particular provision?

A dialogue about fundamental constitutional values attendant to constitutional adjudication must be focused upon the Constitution as a legal text, and, because it is a legal text, the debate must be grounded in legal sources and legal analysis.

Whether one views constitutional interpretation as grounded in a theory of original meaning or the traditional liberal theory of judicial restraint and neutral principles, the distinctive nature of this approach is that it is legal in nature.

Most legal scholars, in one form or another, have embraced constitutional litigation as the ideal forum for moral evaluation of public policy.

It removes proposals to revise the Constitution from the realm of partisan political controversy, and it necessitates the retention of means, similar to those which have been used in the past, to give the needed flexibility to the development of the Constitutional system — means which, as we have already seen, placed the political destinies of the American people under the immediate direction of a group of benevolent guardians.

As Michael Stokes Paulsen reminds us, «The legitimacy of the Supreme Court in our constitutional system rests not on its ability to fashion social and political compromises but on its ability to render decisions that the public readily can recognize as straightforward interpretations of a constitutional or statutory text.&raquAs Michael Stokes Paulsen reminds us, «The legitimacy of the Supreme Court in our constitutional system rests not on its ability to fashion social and political compromises but on its ability to render decisions that the public readily can recognize as straightforward interpretations of a constitutional or statutory text.&raquas straightforward interpretations of a constitutional or statutory text.»

The title of Metaxas» latest book, If You Can Keep It (Viking), is a reference to Benjamin Franklin's response to a woman who asked him, as he left the Constitutional Convention in 1787, «Dr Franklin, what have you given us, a monarchy or a republic?»

«As I understand the various opinions today: One Justice holds that two - parent notification is unconstitutional (at least in the present circumstances) without judicial bypass, but constitutional with bypass; four Justices would hold that two - parent notification is constitutional with or without bypass; four Justices would hold that two - parent notification is unconstitutional with or without bypass, though the four apply two different standards; six Justices hold that one - parent notification with bypass is constitutional, though for two different sets of reasons; and three Justices would hold that one - parent notification with bypass is unconstitutional.»

But, in the Senate, it was criticized as an «election dodge,» and it fell two votes short of the two - thirds required to propose a constitutional amendment.

As for Justice Stevens himself, it is an arresting fact that in the animal sacrifice case he joined the opinion announcing the constitutional requirement that public officials disassociate themselves from antireligious measures.

In a May 30 letter to Catholics across the diocese, Bishop Lori said that the state's announcement came as a «shock» and that the church in Bridgeport had no choice but to act to protect its constitutional rightIn a May 30 letter to Catholics across the diocese, Bishop Lori said that the state's announcement came as a «shock» and that the church in Bridgeport had no choice but to act to protect its constitutional rightin Bridgeport had no choice but to act to protect its constitutional rights.

Writing in Crisis, he observes that a crisis of conscience is created when the courts not only countenance the killing of the innocent but also decree, as in the Casey decision, that moral objection to such injustice is an offense against the constitutional order.

♦ Carl Trueman argues that confessions establish constitutional restraints on church power: «In an age when words, especially words that make truth claims, are always suspected of being part of some manipulative power game, it is perhaps counterintuitive to think of confessions as delimiting the power of the church.

When it came, though, to the force of dissents read aloud, nothing compares with the dissent he delivered in 2013, in the Windsor case, when the Court teed up the decision it would render two years later in proclaiming same - sex marriage as a constitutional right:

In the end, sound constitutional interpretation is ensured not so much by principles on paper as by judges with certain virtues.

McConnell explored the value of tradition generally — as a coordinating mechanism, a democratic check on state power, and a depository of values that endure over time — and then moved to a discussion of tradition and change in constitutional interpretation.

In dissent, Justice Potter Stewart described the Connecticut law he believed constitutional as «uncommonly silly»» which, in retrospect, was a phrase he could have used to describe Griswold v. Connecticut, adding «pernicious» to «silly.&raquIn dissent, Justice Potter Stewart described the Connecticut law he believed constitutional as «uncommonly silly»» which, in retrospect, was a phrase he could have used to describe Griswold v. Connecticut, adding «pernicious» to «silly.&raquin retrospect, was a phrase he could have used to describe Griswold v. Connecticut, adding «pernicious» to «silly.»

«Today's opinion dismantles the structure of constitutional law that has permitted a distinction to be made between heterosexual and homosexual unions, insofar as a formal recognition in marriage is concerned,» wrote Scalia.

In particular, the declaration references the charter's «principles of constitutional contractual citizenship» and «freedom of movement, property ownership, mutual solidarity and defense, as well as principles of justice and equality before the law,» in regards to Muslims and non-MuslimIn particular, the declaration references the charter's «principles of constitutional contractual citizenship» and «freedom of movement, property ownership, mutual solidarity and defense, as well as principles of justice and equality before the law,» in regards to Muslims and non-Muslimin regards to Muslims and non-Muslims.

He reported sarcastically that «there» were some members [at the Constitutional Convention] so unfashionable as to think that a belief of the existence of a Deity, and of a state of future rewards and punishments would be some security for the good conduct of our rulers, and that in a Christian country it would be at least decent to hold out some distinction between the professors of Christianity and downright infidelity or paganism» (IV: 642) This chapter also includes excerpts from state constitutions that imposed religious tests on government officers (Delaware, for example.

In a provocative and profound essay in this magazine («A King in Israel,» May 2010), the late Michael Wyschogrod proposed that the Jewish state define itself as a democratic, constitutional monarchIn a provocative and profound essay in this magazine («A King in Israel,» May 2010), the late Michael Wyschogrod proposed that the Jewish state define itself as a democratic, constitutional monarchin this magazine («A King in Israel,» May 2010), the late Michael Wyschogrod proposed that the Jewish state define itself as a democratic, constitutional monarchin Israel,» May 2010), the late Michael Wyschogrod proposed that the Jewish state define itself as a democratic, constitutional monarchy.

Market economies and constitutional schemes for democratic governance are necessary, but, as Wieseltier correctly notes, the critical forces in self - determination are those realities external to the self by which people believe they are determined.

Speaking in Westminster Hall in 2010, Pope Benedict XVI spoke movingly about Britain's heritage of constitutional government: «Your common law tradition serves as the basis of legal systems in many parts of the world, and your particular vision of the respective remains an inspiration to many across the globe».

Even if all parties were to agree that American republicanism is not classically liberal, or that classical liberalism really is ontologically indifferent, or that the laws of nature and of nature's God are the foundation of constitutional order and that these are the same thing as natural law — even if, in other words, all parties were to agree to some version of a pristine American founding harmonious in principle with the truth of God and the human being — returning to the first principles of the eighteenth century isn't much more realistic than a return to the first principles of the thirteenth.