In addition to making policy recommendations on administration policies affecting faith - based and community programs, the newly - formed office will also inform the administration of «any failures of the executive branch to comply with religious
liberty protections under law.»
According to the Religion News Service, it's also charged with informing the administration of «any failures of the executive branch to comply with religious
liberty protections under law.»
Not exact matches
All citizens must have basic rights to life and
liberty, and political rights to the vote and to equal
protection under the law.
Speech can be regulated only when it directly conflicts with other constitutional conditions of the democratic process — for instance, freedom of religion and assembly, equal
protection under the law, and basic rights to life and
liberty.
That penultimate conclusion compelled the finding that the definition of cyberbullying and the process for obtaining a
protection order «threaten a person's right to
liberty in a manner that offends the principles of fundamental justice»
under Charter s. 7.
However, the MCA has created a statutory basis for lawfully restraining an incapable adult and, where the restraining measures employed amounted to a deprivation of
liberty, a judge sitting in the Court of
Protection has the jurisdiction to declare such acts lawful
under MCA s 15 (1)(c) or to make an order consenting to confinement which would otherwise be a deprivation of
liberty under MCA s 16 (2)(a).
The Court of
Protection Rules have been amended to accommodate applications to that court
under s 21A of MCA 2005 arising from the operation of the scheme, for example an application which disputes a finding by a «supervisory authority», such as a local authority, that a care home resident is in fact deprived of his or her
liberty within the meaning of Art 5 of the Convention.
Filed
under: child
protection, discrimination law, Florida, legal blogs, New Hampshire, religious
liberty, stand your ground
It means that, notwithstanding that a young person has capacity
under the MCA 2005 or a child is Gilick competent, and is refusing the treatment / admission / deprivation of
liberty; whilst the Court of
Protection would have no jurisdiction, a Judge sitting in the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court, could overrule the young person's / child's refusal.
In Crouch, the court was asked to consider (1) whether to re-confirm the
Protection Order
under the Act, and (2) whether the Act violates the Charter by infringing on an individual's freedom of expression or by violating an individual's right to life,
liberty and security of the person.
SW (the Applicant) was P's son - he sought a declaration from the Court
under its inherent jurisdiction that it shall be unlawful for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC - the Respondent) to effect forced entry of the property of P or restrict P's
liberty of movement without the permission of the Court of
Protection.