Ms. Briccetti commended the Cuomo Administration for its willingness to work cooperatively with a longtime New York employer, and commended the state Legislature for approving the proposed amendment twice, as is required in
the case of constitutional amendments.
In
the case of constitutional amendments, almost every legislature must place them before voters.
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.
As long as we continue to club the other Presbyterians into submission with
constitutional amendments, judicial
cases and economic boycotts, we have no word for a world full
of murderous divisions, most
of them cloaked in religion.
As long as Presbyterians continue to club the other into submission with
constitutional amendments, judicial
cases and economic boycotts, we have no word for a world full
of murderous divisions, most
of them cloaked in religion.
As it turns out, these poor fellows may not have been vagrants but merely exercising their
constitutional rights: The Obama Administration recently filed a legal brief in a
case out
of Boise arguing that, in certain circumstances, outlawing sleeping in public violates the Eighth
Amendment proscription against «cruel and unusual punishment.»
In that
case Justice Rehnquist wrote that Alabama has the right to enforce government - sponsored prayer in public schools, and even to establish a state - sponsored church if it wants to — which questions the premise (based on the Fourteenth
Amendment) that
constitutional prohibitions on infringement
of rights extend to the states.
While the First
Amendment would seem to provide the answer to these objections by limiting majority rule in the
case of fundamental freedoms, minority faiths in America know all too well that even
constitutional guarantees are not iron - clad.
The League, along with Citizen's Union, also wants the legislature to adopt a law that requires the same changes, just in
case the
constitutional amendment, which requires the approval
of two consecutively elected legislatures, plus a public vote, does not ultimately pass.
The bill called the «NYS Government Transparency Act» would be a
constitutional amendment that would prevent all legislative proceedings between midnight and 8 a.m. and limit messages
of necessity in
case of instances like a security threat, natural disaster or dire fiscal situation.
Barbara Bartoletti
of the state League
of Women Voters said the
constitutional amendments are not items that the Legislature «is going to be particularly interested in; I think they've made that
case to the governor already.
WAMC's David Guistina talks with Mike Spain
of the Times Union about legal fees two local lawyers, who are also local officials, claim are owed to them from a 2006 civil rights
case and a proposed New York State
constitutional amendment to strip the pensions
of corrupt public officials.
Basically transportation groups, unions and a variety
of state and local leaders are trying to make the
case that people want a
constitutional amendment protecting transportation money.
Noting that the «parties devote a significant portion
of their briefs discussing the question whether the
constitutional provisions at issue in this
case are so - called «Blaine
amendments»» originally motivated by anti-Catholic nativist sentiment, the court found that «none
of the parties has produced any authority suggesting we may disregard
constitutional provisions merely because we suspect they may have been tainted by questionable motives.
CIR filed an amicus brief in a 2012
case challenging California's Prop. 209 on the grounds that a state
constitutional amendment barring the use
of racial preferences was itself illegal racial discrimination.
However, a district judge threw out the
case in 2006, ruling that because the system complied with
Amendment 23, which mandates that school funding increase every year by at least the rate
of inflation, it was
constitutional.
SeaWorld's lawyers say the
case crosses the boundaries
of «legitimate
constitutional debate» and is «utterly lacking in legal merit» because the 13th
Amendment specifically refers to «persons,» not animals.
Yet, if it is primarily the preserve
of constitutional theorists — think
of the American debate about the constitutionality
of a proposed flag - burning
amendment — it is nevertheless an issue with practical implications, as witnessed in the recent Pringle
case before the CJEU.
The bases from which this principle was derived clearly had no
constitutional dimension; there was not the slightest suggestion that the First
Amendment or any other provision
of the Constitution was relevant to the decision in that
case.
Perhaps listening to these podcasts will help my 2Ls who are taking
constitutional law understand the various levels
of scrutiny in First
Amendment cases, a concept that seems to be eluding some
of them.
in Argersinger, the Court today retreats to the indefensible position that the Argersinger «actual imprisonment» standard is the only test for determining the boundary
of the Sixth
Amendment right to appointed counsel in state misdemeanor
cases, thus necessarily deciding that, in many
cases (such as this one), a defendant will have no right to appointed counsel even when he has a
constitutional right to a jury trial.
Finally, it is suggested, even if the States in these
cases may be deemed to have acted in the
constitutional sense, their action did not deprive petitioners
of rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth
Amendment.
In
cases in which the Fourth
Amendment requires that a warrant to search be obtained, «probable cause» is the standard by which a particular decision to search is tested against the
constitutional mandate
of reasonableness.
For example, an analysis
of this concept in the context
of random drug testing
of students engaged in extracurricular activities where the school's common law authority is balanced against
constitutional concerns about privacy under the 4th
Amendment is found in the U.S. Supreme Court
case Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646 (1995).
The
constitutional question presented by this
case is whether members
of the public have a First
Amendment right to insist upon access to the transcript
of a preliminary hearing during the period before the public trial, even though the accused, the prosecutor, and the trial judge have all agreed to the sealing
of the transcript in order to assure a fair trial.
To be sure, there are storm clouds on the progressive legal horizon: the UT affirmative action
case; Shelby County and the future
of the VRA; the reargument in Kiobel; the Article III standing question in the
constitutional challenge to the FISA
Amendments Act; and a host
of other
cases in the food chain in which the Court's conservative majority is likely to assert itself at the expense
of progressives.
We do not interpret
Constitutional case law as supporting the view that a federal agency's review
of information pursuant to statutory mandate violates the Fifth
Amendment protections against forced self incrimination.
Over the past year I've written about the Emoluments Clause; the No Religious Tests clause; limits on presidential power as defined in the steel seizure
case; the meaning
of the oath
of office; how the Appropriations Clause constrains lawsuit settlements involving the federal government; how and whether gerrymandering by race and for partisan advantage affects
constitutional rights; judicial independence; the decline and fall
of the Contracts Clause; the application
of Obergefell to issues
of public employees and birth certificates; Article V procedure for calling a new
constitutional convention; and too many First, Second, Fourth, and Fifth
Amendment controversies to list.