Sentences with phrase «clearly states its ban»

Not exact matches

Despite the American Association of Pediatrics AAP twice clearly stating in 1957, and 1967, that football should be banned for children 12 and under, football's popularity grows and this battle game expands to kids so we leave the film having to wait for the sequel.

Clearly the Republican State Senators who voted in favor of a gun ban have no future running as Statewide Candidates.

A bill sponsored by state Sen. Terry Gipson would only allow expenditures «promoting the nomination or election of a candidate» or for carrying the duties of public office, and would more clearly define the «personal use» ban to cover a range of specific non-campaign-related expenses, including mortgage and rental payments, clothing, cars and sporting events and concerts.

On their side is their union, whose governing documents clearly state: «NEA deplores prepublishing censorship, book - burning crusades, and attempts to ban books from school library media centers and school curricula,» and resolves that «Teachers and school library media specialists must have the right to select and use materials and techniques without censorship or legislative interference.»

And even more sad when considering how pretty much all of the experts (the Danish vet organization, Denmark's Kennel Club, etc) all opposed it, stating clearly that there's no reason for a ban, that it won't work, etc etc etc..

While she won't come out and clearly state that she'd ban fracking, at a March 6 CNN debate with Bernie Sanders in Flint, Michigan, she proudly stated: «By the time we get through all of my conditions, I do not think there will be many places in America where fracking will continue to take place.»

Consequently, taking into account the outcome of the judgment pointed in para 57 clearly stating that «the answer to the question referred is that Article 26 (1) of Framework Decision 2002/584 must be interpreted as meaning that measures such as a nine - hour night - time curfew, in conjunction with the monitoring of the person concerned by means of an electronic tag, an obligation to report to a police station at fixed times on a daily basis or several times a week, and a ban on applying for foreign travel documents, does not, in principle, have regard towards the type, duration, effects and manner of implementation of all those measures; it is restrictive as to give rise to a deprivation of liberty comparable to that arising from imprisonment and thus to be classified as «detention» within the meaning of that provision, which it is nevertheless for the referring court to ascertain».

We have clearly stated that any national whose country has «banned» participating in ICOs is restricted to participate.