First in his original budget, and then in the 30 - day amendments released last Friday, Cuomo placed controversial ethics and education reforms in appropriations bills, over which the Legislature is afforded very little
power under the state Constitution.
Bennett Liebman, government lawyer - in - residence at Albany Law School and former deputy secretary for gaming and racing in the Cuomo administration, told The Alt that while the governor has
the power under the state constitution to remove a district attorney from office through a quasi-judicial proceeding, it is «extraordinarily unlikely» that he will do so in this case.
One basis for the challenge is the scope of the commission's
power under the state constitution.
The split - recovery statute allocating 60 % of punitive damages award to the state did not violate the right to a remedy, the right to a jury trial, the takings or tax provisions, or the separation of
powers under the State Constitution.
Not exact matches
People, person, or persons as used in this
Constitution does not include corporations, limited liability companies or other corporate entities established by the laws of any
state, the United
States, or any foreign
state, and such corporate entities are subject to such regulation as the people, through their elected
state and federal representatives, deem reasonable and are otherwise consistent with the
powers of Congress and the
States under this
Constitution.
Given that Congress jealously guards its
powers under the
Constitution, such an effort would likely gain the support of representatives from most
states, not only those with an economic interest in maintaining NAFTA.
He is now trying to alter the French
constitution to increase his
powers under a
state of emergency, prolong certain of the
powers after it is lifted, and remove legal avenues to challenging them.
It has also been reported that Cuomo threatened to remove sheriffs from office
under a rarely - used
power granted to the Governor by the
State constitution.
Cuomo figures in to this episode because
under Article XIII of the
state Constitution he holds the
power to remove the District Attorney.
To protect the Committee's fundamental rights
under the United
States and New York
State Constitutions against the partisan use of state power, the Committee requests that the Court quash the subpoena and issue a protective order directing that the Committee need not respond to the subpoena's remaining demands.&r
State Constitutions against the partisan use of
state power, the Committee requests that the Court quash the subpoena and issue a protective order directing that the Committee need not respond to the subpoena's remaining demands.&r
state power, the Committee requests that the Court quash the subpoena and issue a protective order directing that the Committee need not respond to the subpoena's remaining demands.»
A statement signed and released on Monday, 22 August by Communications Minister Dr. Edward Omane Boamah said: «The President of the Republic of Ghana, His Excellency John Dramani Mahama, has, in consultation with the Council of
State and in exercise of his constitutional
powers under Article 72 of the
Constitution, remitted the remainder of the prison sentence imposed on three persons: Salifu Maase (alias Mugabe), Alistair Nelson, and Ako Gunn, who were sentenced to four months» imprisonment and a fine of GHS10, 000.00 each for contempt of court.
Its Committee on Basic Education, which investigated the controversial tenure extension,
stated that the President had no
power under the 1999
Constitution (as amended) to extend the tenure of a permanent secretary, who had served out her full service length and retired in February, 2016.
Under Supreme Court constitutional interpretation, since individual states never had the original sovereign authority to unilaterally change the terms and conditions of service of federal officials agreed to and established in the Constitution, such a power could not be «reserved» under the Tenth Amend
Under Supreme Court constitutional interpretation, since individual
states never had the original sovereign authority to unilaterally change the terms and conditions of service of federal officials agreed to and established in the
Constitution, such a
power could not be «reserved»
under the Tenth Amend
under the Tenth Amendment.
In recent years, the Supreme Court has overturned a growing list of congressional statutes on the grounds that they intruded into protected spheres of
state sovereignty or exceeded Congress's delegated
powers under the
Constitution.
We write in our capacity as citizens of the Republic of Ghana invoking the
powers of this Commission
under Article 218 (a) of the 1992
Constitution of Ghana and section 7 (1)(i) of the CHRAJ Act 1993 (Act 456), as amended, which
states «to investigate complaints of violations of fundamental rights and freedoms, injustice, corruption, abuse of
power and unfair treatment of any person by a public officer in the exercise of his official duties», to investigate a case of professional misconduct bothering on official corruption and corruption - related activities involving ACP Mrs. Maame Yaa Tiwaa Addo Danquah, the current acting Director - General of the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service.
The judicial
Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising
under this
Constitution, the Laws of the United
States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made,
under their Authority; — to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; — to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; — to Controversies to which the United
States shall be a Party; — to Controversies between two or more
States; — between a
State and Citizens of another
State; — between Citizens of different
States; — between Citizens of the same
State claiming Lands
under Grants of different
States, and between a
State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign
States, Citizens or Subjects.
I received the petition of the lawyers from the three and they
stated all the grounds for which they thought that I should invoke my
powers under article 72, narrating every step of the way; the regret they had shown and appealing for mercy; and so I did exactly what the
Constitution said I should do.»
The
power given to the Federal Government
under section 162 (3) of the
Constitution, to prescribe the terms and manner of sharing the money in the Federation Account among the federal,
state and local governments is a somewhat over-bearing
power in a federal system.
The attorney general said that Cuomo has the authority
under the
state's
constitution to give his office the
power to to supersede local district attorneys and investigate any crime the governor sees fit.
Mr. Stringer's duties and
powers are a matter of the City Charter, which Mr. Cuomo can not alter, but the governor emphasized that housing the homeless is a responsibility of the
state under its
constitution.
(Syracuse) Howie Hawkins said today that if he was Governor he would use his
power under Art. 4, Sec. 3 of the
State Constitution to call the legislature into extraordinary session to ensure that they complete work on key issues before taking their six month paid vacation.
After reviewing the material provided by Nevin, Kennedy said in an email that «this unsubstantiated county ordinance does not impact the village's authority to exercise its police
power under the [New York
State]
Constitution in relation to regulating signs on public property.»
They also say that
under the
state constitution's separation of
powers doctrine, the commission, created by Cuomo, does not have the right to probe the legislature.
One person briefed on the meeting said Cuomo threatened to remove sheriffs from office, a little - used
power afforded the
state's chief executive
under the
state constitution.
He
stated that the Committee was not a fault - finding one, and is established
under Article 103 of the
Constitution with the
powers of a High Court and therefore tasked managers of the country's resources to ensure value for money in their expenses on behalf of Ghanaians.
Prof. Dankofa, among other things, in suit KDH / KAD / 236 / 2018 is praying the court to «declare that the action of the respondents (Kaduna
State Government and Kaduna Geographic Information Service, KADGIS) in arrogating to themselves the
power to punitively sanction the Applicants (Hunkuyi and his Company, Muna Investment Ltd) property, even if the Applicants were purportedly in default of payment of either ground rent or land use charge or for any other reason constitute a gross violation of Applicant Fundamental Human Right guaranteed
under section 43 (1) and 46 (1) of the
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) and therefore illegal, unconstitutional, null and void.»
In fact, they saw it as a foundational responsibility of any government and determined that it was best left to the
states under the Tenth Amendment, which says, «The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.&
states under the Tenth Amendment, which says, «The
powers not delegated to the United
States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.&
States by the
Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the
States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.&
States, are reserved to the
States respectively, or to the people.&
States respectively, or to the people.»
The U.S.
Constitution lays out a federal approach in which specific
powers are enumerated for the national government with all remaining
powers —
under the Tenth Amendment — reserved to the
states or the people.
Because of the balance of
powers under the
constitution the United
States has so far avoided the economically disastrous rush to control of CO2 emissions and move to renewable energy seen in the UK and Germany The resultant increase in electricity prices is now forcing these countries to reconsider their entire energy policy.
«Treating this pipeline facility and company differently than all other regulated projects and entities that operate in Vermont would arguably run afoul of federal pre-emption principles that explicitly bar
states from regulating oil pipeline safety; potentially constitute an impermissible attempt to nullify the President's exercise of his foreign affairs
power under the U.S.
Constitution as reflected in the Presidential Permits issued to Portland Pipe Line and potentially impose an unconstitutional burden on foreign or interstate commerce.»
«Nothing in the
Constitution of the United
States gives the Congress or the Executive Branch the
power to attempt the task of regulating climate, as impossible as that would be
under any realistic scenarios.
The only real solution is for the
states to exercise their
power under Article V of the
constitution to propose constitutional amendments that will mandate a balanced budget and in other ways rein in the federal government.
Justice Andrés Ollero highlights in his opinion that, while Spain is bound
under Article 93 of the
Constitution as a Member
State of the EU, he supports the idea set forth in part 3 that the transference of sovereign
powers has material limits.
In affirming, both the
State Court of Appeals and the
State Supreme Court rejected Honda's argument that the punitive damages award violated due process because it was excessive and because Oregon courts have no
power to correct excessive verdicts
under a 1910 amendment to the
State Constitution, which prohibits judicial review of the amount of punitive damages awarded by a jury «unless the court can affirmatively say there is no evidence to support the verdict.»
And we beg leave to add with all due deference that no decision of any court of the United
States can
under any circumstances, in our opinion, agreeable to the
Constitution, be liable to a reversion or even suspension by the legislature itself, in whom no judicial
power of any kind appears to be vested but the important one relative to impeachments.»
Nelson reminds me of
State v. Lessley, the case from a few years ago which addressed whether the state has the power under the Minnesota constitution to veto a defendant's decision to waive a jury t
State v. Lessley, the case from a few years ago which addressed whether the
state has the power under the Minnesota constitution to veto a defendant's decision to waive a jury t
state has the
power under the Minnesota
constitution to veto a defendant's decision to waive a jury trial.
Lord Irvine explained his intention in his second reading speech: «The traditional freedom of the individual
under an unwritten
constitution... gives no protection from misuse of
power by the
state... Our courts will develop human rights throughout society.»
A
state court is has the
power to enforce greater protections to a person claiming rights, relying on the
state's
constitution, than those guaranteed
under the federal
constitution.
Therefore
states (
state, county, municipal all treated as an extension of
state power under the US
Constitution) are not required to to adhere to the flag code.
Under the French
Constitution, tailored for the presidency of Charles de Gaulle, the French head of
state has vast
powers, including the right to nominate the prime minister, dissolve the National Assembly and set the voting agenda.
The Kansas Senate approved an amendment that would prohibit the courts from ordering more money for schools («The financing of the educational interests of the
state is exclusively a legislative
power under article 2 of the
constitution of the
state of Kansas and as such shall be established solely by the legislature.»)
Although it was not necessary for the resolution of the issues in the case, the Court
stated that provincial exercises of
power that impact rights flowing from Aboriginal title should be analysed
under section 35 of the
Constitution Act, 1982, in particular by assessing whether the violation of Aboriginal rights can be justified by the province (at paras 140 - 152).
Thus it will be seen by these quotations from the opinion that the court, after
stating the question it was about to decide in a manner too plain to be misunderstood, proceeded to decide it, and announced, as the opinion of the tribunal, that in organizing the judicial department of the Government in a Territory of the United
States, Congress does not act
under, and is not restricted by, the third article in the
Constitution, and is not bound, in a Territory, to ordain and establish courts in which the judges hold their offices during good behaviour, but may exercise the discretionary
power which a
State exercises in establishing its judicial department and regulating the jurisdiction of its courts, and may authorize the Territorial Government to establish, or may itself establish, courts in which the judges hold their offices for a term of years only, and may vest in them judicial
power upon subjects confided to the judiciary of the United
States.
Under the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the US
Constitution, a federal law is binding on all
state and local governments so long as Congress duly enacted the law pursuant to one of its limited
powers.
«the judicial
power shall extend to all cases in law and equity arising
under the
Constitution, the laws of the United
States, or treaties made or which shall be made
under their authority; to all cases affecting ambassadors or other public ministers and consuls; to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction; to controversies, to which the United
State courts have also recognized that legislative immunity provisions enshrined in state constitutions also protect this bedrock principle.12 Moreover, as one Florida appellate court noted, legislative immunity is integral to the constitutional separation of powers: «The power vested in the legislature under the Florida Constitution would be severely compromised if [the judicial branch could compel] legislators... to appear in court to explain why they voted a particular way or to describe their process of gathering information on a bill.&r
State courts have also recognized that legislative immunity provisions enshrined in
state constitutions also protect this bedrock principle.12 Moreover, as one Florida appellate court noted, legislative immunity is integral to the constitutional separation of powers: «The power vested in the legislature under the Florida Constitution would be severely compromised if [the judicial branch could compel] legislators... to appear in court to explain why they voted a particular way or to describe their process of gathering information on a bill.&r
state constitutions also protect this bedrock principle.12 Moreover, as one Florida appellate court noted, legislative immunity is integral to the constitutional separation of
powers: «The
power vested in the legislature
under the Florida
Constitution would be severely compromised if [the judicial branch could compel] legislators... to appear in court to explain why they voted a particular way or to describe their process of gathering information on a bill.»
The federal government is ultimately superior (see: federal supremacy clause), however the
states manage the vast majority of laws for health and safety internally separately
under their
constitution and
state police
power.
(The judicial
Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising
under this
Constitution, the Laws of the United
States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made,
under their Authority; to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United
States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more
States; between a
State and Citizens of another
State; between Citizens of different
States; between Citizens of the same
State claiming Lands
under Grants of different
States, and between a
State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign
States, Citizens or Subjects.)
Of all the courts which the United
States may,
under their general
powers, constitute, one only, the Supreme Court, possesses jurisdiction derived immediately from the
Constitution and of which the legislative
power can not deprive it.
«Unlike the Congress of the United
States, the General Assembly of Virginia functions
under no grant of
power»... The General Assembly, in «represent [ing] the sovereign authority of the people» is restricted only by the
Constitution of Virginia «in express terms or by strong implication»... [I] t is a restraining instrument, and... the General Assembly... possesses all legislative
power not prohibited by the
Constitution»... In short, «[u] nless forbidden by some
State or Federal constitutional provision,» the General Assembly's «
powers are plenary.