Sentences with phrase «constitutional rights of children»

For example, the Alliance for Non-Custodial Parents Rights (ANCPR) announces that their mission is to «promote Equal Parenting (shared parenting) for children and believes that child support enforcement and sole custody violate the constitutional rights of children and their non-custodial mothers and fathers» (http://www.pacificnet.net/~ljaks/).

«Reed is a reminder that collective - bargaining agreements have to yield to the constitutional rights of children,» he said.

«Across the state, the constitutional rights of children have been violated.

The League of Women Voters of PA commends the plaintiffs for their courage in fighting to hold Harrisburg accountable and re-enforce the constitutional right of every child to receive an education that will allow them to become productive members of society.

Not exact matches

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.

Since Roe v Wade, pro-life advocates have argued that an unborn child is unarguably human, and therefore deserves of the same constitutional right as you and I enjoy — namely, the right to live.

According to the logic of the Court, the Free Exercise Clause does not protect churches in these circumstances, unless some other constitutional right, such as Free Speech or the right of parents to control the upbringing of their children, is violated by the governmental intrusion.

According to Mr Amenowode the practice is a breach of the constitutional and fundamental human rights of children and a liability to socio - economic development.

The mission and purpose of HOME is to support homeschooling families in their God - given and constitutional right and responsibility to oversee the education of their children.

Too many children don't fully learn what it means to have the constitutional right of free speech — which means that they also don't learn how to communicate with a peer when they are offended by what she says.

Parents, on behalf of their children at three largely Hispanic and African - American schools, had sued the district, arguing that these layoffs created an unstable learning environment, and thereby violated students» constitutional right to «equal and adequate educational opportunity.»

Much has changed since the fledgling Campaign for Fiscal Equity (CFE), 14 New York City community school boards, and 23 individual parents and their children lodged the initial complaint charging the State of New York with denying «thousands of public school students in the City of New York their constitutional rights to equal educational opportunities.»

The student plaintiffs argue that Connecticut's actions, which the State knows are causing severe harm to tens of thousands of students of color and those from low - income families, infringe upon the constitutional rights of Connecticut children.

The plaintiffs in CCJEF v. Rell charge that the state is violating the constitutional right of Connecticut's children to an adequate education by depriving school districts of billions of dollars.

In the opening statement for the students, Ted Boutrous argued that every child has a constitutional right to a quality education — a right that has been violated due to the current teacher employment statues that he claimed handcuffs administrators in weeding ineffective teachers out of the classroom.

Just as importantly, eight decades of court rulings — driven by the courtroom work of civil rights activists and school funding equity advocates — also provides reformers with the legal arguments necessary to challenge tenure laws and other policies that impede the constitutional obligation of states to provide children with high - quality education.

To end Washington's discrimination against special needs kids in religious schools — and to vindicate the rights of parents to choose their children's schools from a wide array of options, including public, private and religious schools — the Institute for Justice Washington Chapter filed a federal constitutional lawsuit challenging the special education ban.

Amici Curiae point to the widespread ability of sister states to enforce children's constitutional rights to an adequate education without violating the prerogatives of the legislative and executive branches of government.

At the urging of Mayor Villaraigosa and his Partnership for Los Angeles School, the ACLU and Public Counsel filed a lawsuit (Reed v. Smith) on behalf of Gompers, Liechty, and Markham Middle Schools arguing that the children's constitutional right to a quality education was being violated due to the disproportionate impact of teacher layoffs at those schools.

The story of American public education has generally been one of continuing progress, as girls, children of color, and children with disabilities (among others) have redeemed their constitutional right to push through the schoolhouse gate.

On behalf of Andrea, Victoria and Crystal, the Institute for Justice will argue that parents have a protected constitutional right to control and direct the upbringing and education of their children5 and that nothing in the Arizona Constitution prohibits the state from giving parents the freedom to decide how best to spend the money that is appropriated to educate their children.

«Time and time again, the court has intervened when the state's laws and policies deprive our children, particularly our most vulnerable children, of their constitutional rights.

In Connecticut and nationally, courts have consistently ruled that underfunded schools amount to constitutional violations of children's right to an education.

The children of North Carolina, like all children in the United States, enjoy a federal constitutional right to attend private schools.

But whether Governor Malloy and Attorney General Jepsen have reversed themselves and no longer believe in the constitutional right of Connecticut's children or are simply trying to push the case past the next gubernatorial election, the duo have asked the Connecticut court to dismiss the case entirely.

The mission and purpose of HOME is to support homeschooling families in their God - given and constitutional right and responsibility to oversee the education of their children.

The mission and purpose of HOME is to support homeschooling families in their God - given and constitutional right and responsibility to oversee the education of their children.

Mr. Tillerson himself has been asked to testify about the role of fossil fuel companies and the government in causing climate change, as part of a lawsuit brought by children alleging their constitutional rights have been violated.

«Basically, what they're saying is because of my beliefs and I'm a Nazi, that us people don't have any constitutional rights to fight for our children,» Campbell said.

Parents are not asked for permission, nor do the facilities seek an alternative authorization under state child welfare laws, says plaintiffs» attorney Carlos Holguín of the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law in Los Angeles.

-- the petition of the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court, a petitioner, requesting an investigation into whether Item 1 of Paragraph 1 of Article 1 and Item 1 of Paragraph 1 of Article 17 of the Republic of Lithuania's Law on Citizenship to the extent that it provides that the persons who held citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania prior to 15 June 1940, their children, grandchildren and great - grandchildren (provided that said persons, their children, grandchildren or great - grandchildren have not repatriated), who are residing in other states, shall retain the right to citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania for an indefinite period of time, and whether Paragraph 2 of Article 2 of the Republic of Lithuania's Law on the Implementation of the Law on Citizenship are not in conflict with Paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 29 and Paragraphs 1 and 3 of Article 12 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania, and with the constitutional principles of justice and a state under the rule of law.

-- the provision «the following persons shall retain the right to citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania for an indefinite period of time: (1) persons who held citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania prior to 15 June 1940, their children, grandchildren and great - grandchildren (provided that said persons, their children, grandchildren or great - grandchildren have not repatriated), who are residing in other states» of Paragraph 1 (wording of 17 September 2002) of Article 17 of the Law on Citizenship, to the extent that, according to the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court, a petitioner, it entrenches that the right to citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania shall not be retained to the persons who held citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania prior to 15 June 1940, their children, grandchildren and great - grandchildren, provided that said persons, their children, grandchildren or great - grandchildren have repatriated, and who are residing in other states, is not in conflict with Article 29 and Paragraphs 1 and 3 of Article 12 of the Constitution and with the constitutional principles of justice and a state under the rule of law;

The Vilnius Regional Administrative Court, a petitioner, requests an investigation into whether Item 1 of Paragraph 1 of Article 1 and Item 1 of Paragraph 1 of Article 17 of the Law on Citizenship, to the extent that it provides that the persons who held citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania prior to 15 June 1940, their children, grandchildren and great - grandchildren (provided that said persons, their children, grandchildren or great - grandchildren have not repatriated), who are residing in other states, shall retain the right to citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania for an indefinite period of time, and whether Paragraph 2 of Article 2 of the Law on the Implementation of the Law on Citizenship are not in conflict with Paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 29 and Paragraphs 1 and 3 of Article 12 of the Constitution, and with the constitutional principles of justice and a state under the rule of law.

Having held that the provision «provided that these persons, their children, grandchildren or great - grandchildren have not repatriated» of Item 1 (wording of 17 September 2002) of Paragraph 1 of Article 17 of the Law on Citizenship is in conflict with Article 29 of the Constitution and with the constitutional principle of a state under the rule of law, the Constitutional Court will not further investigate whether the provision «the following persons shall retain the right to citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania for an indefinite period of time: (1) persons who held citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania prior to 15 June 1940, their children, grandchildren and great - grandchildren (provided that said persons, their children, grandchildren or great - grandchildren have not repatriated), who are residing in other states» of Paragraph 1 (wording of 17 September 2002) of Article 17 of this law to the extent that, according to the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court, a petitioner, it entrenches that the right to citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania shall not be retained to persons who held citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania prior to 15 June 1940, their children, grandchildren and great - grandchildren who reside in other states, provided that these persons, their children, grandchildren or great - grandchildren have repatriated, is not in conflict with Paragraphs 1 and 3 of Article 12 of the Constitution and with the constitutional principconstitutional principle of a state under the rule of law, the Constitutional Court will not further investigate whether the provision «the following persons shall retain the right to citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania for an indefinite period of time: (1) persons who held citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania prior to 15 June 1940, their children, grandchildren and great - grandchildren (provided that said persons, their children, grandchildren or great - grandchildren have not repatriated), who are residing in other states» of Paragraph 1 (wording of 17 September 2002) of Article 17 of this law to the extent that, according to the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court, a petitioner, it entrenches that the right to citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania shall not be retained to persons who held citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania prior to 15 June 1940, their children, grandchildren and great - grandchildren who reside in other states, provided that these persons, their children, grandchildren or great - grandchildren have repatriated, is not in conflict with Paragraphs 1 and 3 of Article 12 of the Constitution and with the constitutional principConstitutional Court will not further investigate whether the provision «the following persons shall retain the right to citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania for an indefinite period of time: (1) persons who held citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania prior to 15 June 1940, their children, grandchildren and great - grandchildren (provided that said persons, their children, grandchildren or great - grandchildren have not repatriated), who are residing in other states» of Paragraph 1 (wording of 17 September 2002) of Article 17 of this law to the extent that, according to the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court, a petitioner, it entrenches that the right to citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania shall not be retained to persons who held citizenship of the Republic of Lithuania prior to 15 June 1940, their children, grandchildren and great - grandchildren who reside in other states, provided that these persons, their children, grandchildren or great - grandchildren have repatriated, is not in conflict with Paragraphs 1 and 3 of Article 12 of the Constitution and with the constitutional principconstitutional principle of justice.

Finally, Justice Weagant considered the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in the preamble of the Youth Criminal Justice Act to find that society also had an interest in ensuring that the officers maintained a «heightened duty to jealously guard the young person's constitutional rights.&Rights of the Child in the preamble of the Youth Criminal Justice Act to find that society also had an interest in ensuring that the officers maintained a «heightened duty to jealously guard the young person's constitutional rights.&rights.»

Lawyers from the Center for Constitutional Rights have filed a complaint on behalf of SNAP, a survivor support group, at the International Criminal Court (ICC) alleging that senior Vatican officials — including the current Pope — have committed crimes against humanity on the basis that «Vatican officials tolerate and enable the systematic and widespread concealing of rape and child sex crimes throughout the world.»

Public interest work can be in any number of practice areas including: Administrative law, AIDS / HIV, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Animal Rights, Appellate, Arts, Bankruptcy, Children / Youth, Civil Rights / Civil Liberties, Community Economic Development, Constitutional, Consumer Law, Criminal Law, Death Penalty, Prisoners» Rights, Disability, Education, Elder Law, Employment Law, Environmental / Energy, Family Law, Gay / Lesbian Rights, Health / Medical, Homeless / Housing Law, Immigration, International Human Rights, Legislative, Litigation, Migrant Workers, Municipal Law, Native Americans, Public Benefits, Tax, Women.

Select WebLaw Subject Guide Administrative Law Biotechnology Law Children & the Law Citizenship and Migration Constitutional Law Corporations Law Criminology Cyberspace Law Dispute Resolution e-Commerce Law Environmental Law European Union Law Family Law Government Health Law Human Rights Industrial Law Intellectual Property International Law Law of the Sea Legal Research Media and Telecommunications Native Title Policing Privacy Property Law Sports Law Taxation Law Women and the Law

April 29, 2014 End Public Funding of Alberta's Evangelical Schools Schools receive government funding while they violate the rights of children CALGARY, ALBERTA --(Marketwired — April 29, 2014)-- The constitutional rights of students in Alberta's alternative public -LSB-...]

The parents of an eight year - old child have filed suit against the child's school, alleging negligence and violations of their child's statutory and constitutional rights.

Over the past year, Weil's pro bono matters spanned the spectrum of need, including asylum and refuge, criminal justice reform, human rights, community and economic development, civil and constitutional rights and children's welfare.

The judge found that while the law «minimally impairs» the constitutional right of religious freedom, it is justified by the harms polygamy causes to women, children and society.

Need for clarification Oliver Heald MP, a former shadow secretary of state for constitutional aff airs, has stated that there is a case for a law which clarifi es the rights of those who have lived together for a long period of time, or for those who have children, but two years — the length of time proposed by the Law Commission — seems a ludicrously short period of time for anyone to acquire these rights.

• Administrative Law • Antitrust & Regulated Industries • Asian Law • Bankruptcy, Reorganization, & Creditors» Rights • Canadian Law • Comparative Law • Constitutional Law, Jurisprudence & Legal Philosophy Journals • Contracts & Commercial Law • Corporate, Securities & Finance Law Journals • Criminal Law & Procedure • Cyberspace Law • Discrimination, Law & Justice • Employment, Labor, Compensation & Pension Journals • English & Commonwealth Law • Environmental Law & Policy • European Law Journals • Evidence & Evidentiary Procedure • Experimental & Empirical Studies • Family & Children's Law • Health Law Journals • Housing & Community Development Law • Forensic Economics • Immigration, Refugee & Citizenship Law • India Law • Indigenous Nations & Peoples Law • Insurance Law, Legislation, & Policy • Intellectual Property Law • International Law & Trade • LSN Educator: Courses, Materials & Teaching • Law & Economics • Law & Humanities • Law & Humanities / Legal History (Archive) • Law & Positive Political Theory • Law & Society • Law, Institutions & Development • Law, Norms & Informal Order • Legal Education • Legal Ethics & Professional Responsibility • Legal History • Legislation & Statutory Interpretation • Litigation, Procedure & Dispute Resolution Journals • National Security & Foreign Relations Law • Nonprofit & Philanthropy Law • Property, Citizenship, & Social Entrepreneurism • Property, Land Use & Real Estate Law • Regulation of Financial Institutions • Tax Law & Policy Journals • Torts & Products Liability Law • Wills, Trusts, & Estates Law • Women, Gender & the Law • Young Scholars Law

1 Is Canada's law banning the possession of child pornography constitutional or, conversely, does it unjustifiably intrude on the constitutional right of Canadians to free expression?

The law is suggesting that animals have more rights than children which directly contradicts the constitutional values of the UK and provisions enacted for citizens» personal protection under the Human Rights Actrights than children which directly contradicts the constitutional values of the UK and provisions enacted for citizens» personal protection under the Human Rights ActRights Act 1998.

In the contested relocation of a child, courts balance the custodial parent's constitutional right to travel against the state's responsibility to protect the child.

In relocation and removal of a child, courts in general balance the custodial parent's constitutional right to travel against the state's interest in protecting the best interest of the child.

Other visionary jurists, constituting in fact and in law the predominant view, reduce the removal inquiries to an unadorned single question — irrespective of the custodial parent's constitutional right to travel, is relocation in the best interests of the affected child?

The most important legal rule to understand up front is that the United States Supreme Court has said that parents have a constitutional right to custody of their children.