Sentences with phrase «n't follow this rule of law»

If anyone can name one state of the union that doesn't follow this rule of Law, please let me know forthwith...

Not exact matches

34 into law, the FCC can not ever make another set of rules that makes ISPs follow the same privacy guidelines it adopted last year.

The fact is, creating virtual havoc is just so much damn fun and a game where the character follows the rules to the letter of the law just wouldn't be all that enjoyable.

It's not — from the people who serve in this Parliament, it's not enough to simply follow the rules or follow the ethics code or even follow the law because we have a government right now that has broken repeatedly all three of those.

EDMONTON — Albertans know they must follow the rules and abide by the law and they expect the leaders of this province to do the same and be subject to the same consequences when they don't, NDP Leader Rachel Notley said today.

That is the whole point of the law, it shows us we are sinners in need of savior, because if we try to follow the rules we find out we aren't capable without the power of the holy spirit.

Since atheists have a wide variety of ethical views they will not follow a single set of laws but different rules pertaining to their different belief systems.

People are not following the rules of bible and God's laws.

1 Corinthians 11:14 (Men should not have long hair) 1 Corinthians 14:34 - 35 (Women should remain silent in church) Deuteronomy 13:6 - 16 (Death penalty for Apostasy) Deuteronomy 20:10 - 14 (Attack city, kill all men, keep women, children as spoils of war) Deuteronomy 21:18 - 21 (Death penalty for a rebellious son) Deuteronomy 22:19 - 25 (Kill non - virgin / kill adulterers / rapists) Ecclesiastes 1:18 (Knowledge is bad) Exodus 21:1 - 7 (Rules for buying slaves) Exodus 35:2 (Death for working on the Sabbath) Ezekiel 9:5 - 6 (Murder women / children) Genesis 1:3,4,5,11,12,16 (God creates light, night and day, plants grow, before creating sun) Genesis 3:16 (Man shall rule over woman) Jeremiah 19:9 (Cannibalism) John 3:18 (He who believes in Jesus is saved, he that doesn't is condemned) John 5:46 - 47 (Jesus references Old Testament) Leviticus 3:1 - 17 (Procedure for animal sacrifice) Leviticus 19:19 (No mixed fabrics in clothing) Leviticus 19:27 (Don't trim hair or beard) Leviticus 19:28 (No tattoos) Leviticus 20:9 (Death for cursing father or mother) Leviticus 20:10 (Death for adultery) Leviticus 20:13 (Death for gay men) Leviticus 21:17 - 23 (Ugly people, lame, dwarfs, not welcome on altar) Leviticus 25:45 (Strangers can be bought as slaves) Luke 12:33 (Sell your possessions, and give to the poor) Luke 14:26 (You must hate your family and yourself to follow Jesus) Mark 10:11 - 12 (Leaving your spouse for another is adultery) Mark 10:21 - 22 (Sell your possessions and give to the poor) Mark 10:24 - 25 (Next to impossible for rich to get into heaven) Mark 16:15 - 16 (Those who hear the gospel and don't believe go to hell) Matthew 5:17 - 19 (Jesus says he has come to enforce the laws of the Old Testament) Matthew 6:5 - 6 (Pray in secret) Matthew 6:18 (Fast for Lent in secret) Matthew 9:12 (The healthy don't need a doctor, the sick do) Matthew 10:34 - 37 (Jesus comes with sword, turns families against each other, those that love family more than him are not worthy) Matthew 12:30 (If you're not with Jesus, you're against him) Matthew 15:4 (Death for not honouring your father and mother) Matthew 22:29 (Jesus references Old Testament) Matthew 24:37 (Jesus references Old Testament) Numbers 14:18 (Following generations blamed for the sins of previous ones) Psalms 137:9 (Violence against children) Revelation 6:13 (The stars fell to earth like figs) Revelation 21:8 (Unbelievers, among others, go to hell) 1 Timothy 2:11 - 12 (Women subordinate and must remain silent) 1 Timothy 5:8 (If you don't provide for your family, you are an infidel)

The rule of law, then, does not mean that the people should follow only the established codes, remaining respectfully obedient to them and never criticizing or changing them.

Remember I said many not all but the many I speak of seem to speak loudly and tend to push others into having laws / rules that follow their religion instead of what's really pure and good for mankind.

Any organization who wants the protection of the government when it works to their benefit, but doesn't to follow the laws & rules that government lays down, should have their non-profit tax exempt status revoked.

I've noticed that many Christians see the Bible as a book that's chock full of easy to follow laws and rules that tell you what to do (Paul said this so we must... they did this so we must...) and proof texts (it says here that Jesus said that who ever is not for him is against him so I forbid you to listen to Britney Spears).

«Truth», you are not understanding something very important here: In America we follow the rule of law, not your Bible and not your personal interpretation of it, but the Law of this countlaw, not your Bible and not your personal interpretation of it, but the Law of this countLaw of this country.

This guy Jesus, though, believed that following the rule of law wasn't enough (re: the Jewish leadership at the time) and instead what mattered was your heart: what you think, what you do, and what you choose with your life.

The director of an investment fund can not be seen as being above the law; he must follow the same rules that the plebes do.

Jesus did not do away with any of those things just as He did not do away with the LAw — only that we should follow Him becasue of belief and love not becasue of some written rule to fear.

Even though the use of car seats is a law in most places; some parents still do not follow the rules.

There is this popular argument that President Muhammadu Buhari is not properly following the «rule of law» or «due process of the law» in his anti-corruption (more - specifically anti-looting) fight.

Indeed, although it had not been abused enough by the time of the 1961 Convention for states to consider it worthwhile explicitly laying out that the rules about personae non gratae could be applied to diplomatic couriers, even though it was generally considered that they could, later draft articles from the International Law Commission explicitly dealt with this subject, clearly supporting the notion that the U.K. can follow U.K. law in this way and proactively or immediately deny Assange diplomatic courier statLaw Commission explicitly dealt with this subject, clearly supporting the notion that the U.K. can follow U.K. law in this way and proactively or immediately deny Assange diplomatic courier statlaw in this way and proactively or immediately deny Assange diplomatic courier status.

I'm also 100 % for riding the butts of the power companies that own the nukes — if they don't follow the safety rules / laws relating to nuclear power plants.

ICYMI: The Brennan Center's Democracy Program Director Wendy Weiser told me during a CapTon interview last night that she and her allies have not ruled out suing to force LATFOR to follow the law that requires prisoners to be counted at their last known address and not where they're doing time for the purposes of redistricting.

«The NCC goaded and guided by some ambitious presidential aspirants had shown clearly the paths of constitutionality and rule of law is not theirs to follow.

While reacting to a purported protest carried out by members of the association, the State Government said though it was not against peaceful protest by aggrieved citizens but it would not be stampeded into taking any action without strictly following due process and rule of law.

The committee will also deal with acts of indiscipline among their ranks and file and «constantly remind officers that they are not above the law, must respect the rule of law and follow their respective chain of command procedures for addressing breaches of law and acts of indiscipline,» the statement added.

Rules of Engagement) is a green, but very ambitious police officer who desires strongly to follow in his father's footsepts by becoming a detective lieutenant, which he attains by taking partial credit for the infamous Nite Owl murders, where three men barge into a diner and kill all of the inhabitants inside, including a former police officer named Stensland (Beckel, Blue Streak) Stensland's former partner is Bud White (Crowe, The Quick and the Dead), a rough - and - tumble cop as loyal as they come, but also willing to do the things that Exley is not, namely, to cross over the line of the law to see that justice is served.

32 The New Hampshire Supreme Court likewise rejected the standing of petitioners challenging the state's scholarship tax credit law, ruling that they could not demonstrate any harm.33 The following year, citing the decisions in Arizona and New Hampshire, the Alabama Supreme Court also held that a «tax credit to a parent or a corporation... can not be construed as an «appropriation»» but rather such funds retain their status as private funds until they enter the public treasury.34 That view seems to be the prevailing one in courts, so with the possible exception of Michigan, where the state constitution explicitly prohibits tax benefits for religious education, tax credits should survive scrutiny under such provisions.

There needs to be a body that takes care of that, because a lot of there are still places that are not complying with the law or following the rules and regulations,» he said.

Yet in November 2009, the Supreme Court ruled in a shock judgment, that followed strong arguments from the banks expensive barristers, that due to a narrow technical decision bank charges didn't NEED to be fair — well at least on the main piece of law that was tried.

«The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled today that the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) did not follow the law in its recently - announced decision to allow the importation of elephant and lion «trophies» from Zimbabwe and Zambia.

Properly licensed and humanely operated facilities are providing families with pets under the guidance of extensive current regulations enforced by state government... We don't need more laws and more government limitations on those who follow the rules».

Note that if you do not follow the rules in these law (including giving the government prompt notice of your injury claim), you will lose the right to receive any compensation for injuries caused by the government.

Assume that all this conduct is governed by the law of the State of Ilium; but because Ilium doesn't have much caselaw on these subjects, Ilium judges are potentially open to following any of the rules that we have discussed in class.

But UK judges are not elected either: they are appointed, mostly by Her Majesty the Queen, and our concept of the rule of law is of a judgment - seat before which the government and our legislators may be brought to account for exceeding their powers or not following due process.

A Boise personal injury attorney and accident lawyer at Parke Gordon Law Firm has a track record of success in recovering compensation for car crash clients who are injured when another driver is not following the rules of the road, such as drivers who run stop signs, run red lights, are not paying attention, rear - end our clients, drive while drunk, or fail to yield the right of way.

Although the Supreme Court of Canada held in Christie that a «general access to legal services in relation to court and tribunal proceedings dealing with rights and obligations» is not a fundamental aspect of the rule of law (see paras. 23 - 27), it does not follow that the legal profession can preserve its monopoly over legal services free from government regulation or control of any kind, even when, as now, it has made legal services unavailable at reasonable cost to a large majority of the population.

Although the judge may decide to give you some leeway in how you follow the rules of court and court procedures, the judge must apply the law equally to you and to the other party, whether the other party has a lawyer or not.

When a lawyer is suspended for not following the rules of professional conduct or potentially disbarred for breaking a law, they can no longer advocate for their clients interests.

The Dutch reference for a preliminary ruling is based on the following facts: A report commissioned by the Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture had opined that the lending of e-books did not fall within the scope of application of Directive 2006/115 (as transposed into Dutch law) and, as a result, libraries could not benefit from an exception to the exclusive lending right to lend e-books to the public.

The ruling follows a Law Society court action to secure an injunction against the «Solicitors from Hell» website to protect its members and the public, on the grounds the site was not a credible source of reliable information about solicitors.

-- 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 lLaw 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 lawlaw;

-- the provision «the following persons shall be citizens of the Republic of Lithuania: (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)» of Article 1 (wording of 17 September 2002) of the Law on Citizenship, to the extent that, according to the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court, a petitioner, it entrenches 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 repatriated, are not considered as citizens of the Republic of Lithuania, 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 lLaw on Citizenship, to the extent that, according to the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court, a petitioner, it entrenches 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 repatriated, are not considered as citizens of the Republic of Lithuania, 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 lawlaw;

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 principle of justiLaw 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 principle of justilaw, 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 principle of justilaw 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 principle of justice.

Operators of cars, trucks and motorcycles are required by law to yield to pedestrians in crosswalks, an important rule that drivers do not always follow.

The problem is simply stated as follows: Develop a principled approach to reconcile traditional accounts of the rule of law with the modern reality that administrative agencies and statutory tribunals who do not operate like or resemble the ordinary courts but who nevertheless occupy a large amount of space in our legal system and can not avoid making legal determinations in exercising their statutory duties which often implicate individual rights and interests to a greater extent than judicial decisions.

I couldn't help responding as follows, all of which is property of and was originally posted at AdvocateDaily.com A Supreme Court ruling that put an end to law enforcement agencies being able to informally ask Internet Service Providers (ISPs) for subscriber information doesn't prohibit... Continue Reading →

So this isn't something that they kind of took lightly, this is something that gave them some mixed emotions and some pause as to what they were doing, but on the other hand they saw it as an opportunity to help try to bring in American legal traditions and respect for the rule of law, and they feel like it's a good way to kind of if not bring about change in Cuba, but to kind of push Cuba towards accepting at least some of these changes to liberalize the country and open it up for following generations.

Counsel not admitted to the practice of law in this jurisdiction but admitted in any other U.S. jurisdiction or foreign jurisdiction, who is employed as a lawyer in Wisconsin on a continuing basis and employed exclusively by a corporation, association, or other nongovernmental entity, the business of which is lawful and consists of activities other than the practice of law or the provision of legal services, shall register as in - house counsel within 60 days after the commencement of employment as a lawyer or if currently so employed then within 90 days of the effective date of this rule, by submitting to the Board of Bar Examiners the following:

(A) Subject to the requirements of Rule 3.1, a judge may participate in activities sponsored by organizations or governmental entities concerned with the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice, and those sponsored by or on behalf of educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organizations not conducted for profit, including but not limited to the following activities:

The High Court decision follows hard on the heals of the House of Lords» decision [2008] UKHL 6; [2008] 2 WLR 311, [2008] 2 All ER 1, of 30 January 2008, where the law lords effectively changed the law, (reversing a previous House of Lords» ruling in Stubbings v Webb [1993] AC 498, 1993] 1 All ER 322, which held that claims arising from intentional assaults were governed by s 2 of LA 1980), and held that an intentional assault fell within LA 1980, s 11, and was therefore subject to a three - year limitation period, which could be extended by reference to knowledge (s 14), or at the court's discretion (s 33), rather than under LA 1980, s 2, which while providing for a more generous six - year limitation period, was nevertheless not extendable in any circumstances by the court.