Sentences with phrase «many framers»

In Brown's very readable law review article, she explains why — and cites another scholar, Puneet K. Sandhu, who sums up a few reasons why it would be challenging to affirm even if the framers had hoped to do so.

Three facets of today's U.S. civic discourse would worry the Framers, said Eisgruber: «mistrust of institutions,» which they considered crucial to forming a republic; the «geographic sorting» that finds people of like - minded views grouping together rather than being more evenly distributed throughout the country; and the rise of technologies (read: Facebook) that are keeping people from reading facts and views that give them proper «civic understanding.»

These entrepreneurs credit mentors, investors, the framers of the Constitution, and, like Ko, painfully lived personal experiences for their financial wisdom.

He named her chairman of four Berkshire - owned companies — Benjamin Moore, Johns Manville, picture - framer Larson - Juhl, and Oriental Trading — and recently put her on the board of H.J. Heinz.

The framers knew this was a public good,» Klotz says.

Scalia, who died last February, was a leading proponent of originalism, an approach that seeks to resolve constitutional disputes by focusing on the document's text, its historical context and the framers» intentions.

The framers, Gorsuch wrote last year, intended for lawmakers to make the laws, executives to execute them and judges to decipher their meaning.

While the framers did not draft this part of the Constitution with the Internet in mind, they sure as Hell didn't anticipate the advent of genealogical data companies that share DNA information with law enforcement.

Judge Ronald LeBlanc said the original framers of the Constitution never intended that laws should blatantly block the free flow of goods within their new country.

As part of the deal, Growth Street Partners» co-founder, Stephen Wolfe, and Victoria Fram, co-founder and Managing Director of Village Capital, will get seats on Pear Deck's Board of Directors.

The «Mary Tyler Moore» actor argues to ThinkAdvisor that Republicans give the framers too much anti-tax street cred.

He also cited the founding fathers: «The Framers of our Constitution were all too aware of the hysteria that often results from a crime that shocks the community's conscience.»

If the framers of the agreement had pushed too hard for a dispute resolution mechanism, Byers said, the treaty would have died years ago.

The first home being rebuilt in Fountaingrove reached a milestone recently when framers began roughing in the walls of Ed and Kathy Hamilton's Shillingford Place home.

Richard Maybury talks about what the framers of the U.S. Constitution had in mind compared to the political power that we see in the government today.

When the constitutional mandate is sufficiently clear from the text, the understanding of the framers, or the structure of constitutional government, it removes certain matters from popular control and majoritarian rule.

The framers and ratifiers intended it to be a permanent text, establishing fundamental and immutable principles for republican government.

The Ninth Amendment, Goldberg emphasized, reflects the Framers» original understanding that «other fundamental personal rights should not be denied protection simply because they are not specifically listed» in the Consti - tution.

In Home Building and Loan Association v. Blaisdell, the majority explicitly endorsed the idea that the interpretation of the Constitution should reflect «the vision of our time» rather than the intent of the framers.

My whole point of this issue is that if they deny them their civil rights as Americans, they are unconstitutional... and yes, the framers of the constitution had plenty to say about freedom of religion applying to Muslims.

Rather than founding the nation on shared moral or religious ideals, the framers looked to economic self - interest and self - preservation to unify the new nation.

In that study, a group of European and North American scholars sought to probe the developmental social psychology of totalitarian oppressiveness and to delineate the personality characteristics of those who would be its framers and implementers.

Have you forgotten what the framers of this country believed in?

The framers» idea was that all parts of that core have to be kept in play.

On the contrary, the Constitution extends the highest protection to what the framers believed to be the inalienable right to exercise religion according to the dictates of individual conscience.

The notorious Dred Scott decision (1837) asserted that because slaves were their masters» property Congress could not ban slavery anywhere in the United States — a holding that ignored the Framers» compromise of tolerating slavery temporarily but allowing eventual measures against it.

The breadth of many constitutional phrases implies a potential for growth beyond the precise principles that the framers had in mind.

I would love to hear what our key Constitutional framers would say to that.

The framers of the Declaration knew that they could not at that time spell out fully the moral and philosophical reasons undergirding universal human rights.

«My surprise is that the framers of this statement didn't immediately go back and rewrite it because it is so obviously...

In this way of thinking, the Framers had not resolved but had only postponed the question of slavery, and Lincoln's sense that the time had come to move, however cautiously, toward a resolution had about it a force of obligation that he did not hesitate to call sacred.

It was not for the framers to codify these moral prerequisites.

On the most profound level, however, the framers recognized that ordered liberty depends mightily upon certain habits, virtues and practices — that is, upon a moral culture of a highly developed type.

The purpose of instituting governments, as the American framers noted, was not to enumerate human rights but «to secure these rights.»

The framers recognized, in other words, that humans» unalienable liberties entail transcendent obligations.

Prof. Smolin is troubled (as he should be), but also seems puzzled (as he should not be), about how American jurisprudence departed from the premises of the Framers and Abraham Lincoln.

Fearing «the tyranny of the majority» as much as they feared any tyranny, the framers recognized the need to check the democratic principle by the republican principle of representative government.

As a result, the framers often distinguished true liberty from false.

On a somewhat deeper but still visible plane the framers saw that the originality of the novus ordo — what made it, in fact, a new order — lay in the unprecedented degree of liberty each citizen possessed to define the course of his or her own «pursuit of happiness.»

But I also don't think that precludes us fram rationalizing in a way that tries to disguise true motives, even to ourselves, or to allow our deep desires to override a sen of unease we might otherwise have.

The framers saw little point in designing a «new order» for saints.

Though both the conception of human liberty and the virtues necessary to its true exercise sprang from biblical teachings, the framers were careful not to endow biblical religion, or any religion, with state power.

The problem that faced the framers of the Constitution 11 years after the Declaration was how to incarnate that vision in everyday politics.

The framers also paired the notion of limited government and the notion of government under law and under God.

Thus, the universe being once fram'd by God, and the laws of motion settled, and all upheld by his perpetual concourse, and general providence; the same philosophy teaches, that the phenomena of the world, are physically produced by the mechanical properties of the parts of matter; and, that they operate upon one another according to mechanical laws.

If the framers of the Constitution had been more morally courageous in identifying slavery as an evil, or if the later compensatory amendment had rooted liberty in a common human nature rather than on weaker procedural grounds of equality under the law, then perhaps the expansion of protected classes and arbitrary rights would not have advanced so stridently.

As it happened, the texts reflect a relatively brief period of the dominance of a variation of Enlightenment thought — although, to be sure, those texts must be understood, as the framers certainly did understand them, against the background assumptions of what in fact was a Christian society and culture.

Far from pretending to be constituting a world ex nihilo, the framers appeal to «self - evident truths» such as the assumed fact that all are created equal and «endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.»

I'm for going back to a well regulated Milita like the framers intended.

In a way he wouldn't have expected, the progress of science, as Stephens claimed, is on his and not our Framers» side.