Sentences with phrase «state rights you claim»

Booker later quipped: «There's a pattern of you being on side of polluters, even when it restricts state rights you claim to promote.»

Not exact matches

We covered it during the 2016 presidential campaign, when Donald Trump falsely accused former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of giving away U.S. uranium rights to the Russians and claimed — without evidence — that it was done in exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation.

In other words, the SEC claims, the rule simply effectuates existing state law rights.

To be sure, the SEC and its supporters claim that the proxy rules simply make effective rights shareholders have under state law, [6] but in fact shareholder control rights under the latter are extremely limited.

Important factors that may affect the Company's business and operations and that may cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward - looking statements include, but are not limited to, operating in a highly competitive industry; changes in the retail landscape or the loss of key retail customers; the Company's ability to maintain, extend and expand its reputation and brand image; the impacts of the Company's international operations; the Company's ability to leverage its brand value; the Company's ability to predict, identify and interpret changes in consumer preferences and demand; the Company's ability to drive revenue growth in its key product categories, increase its market share, or add products; an impairment of the carrying value of goodwill or other indefinite - lived intangible assets; volatility in commodity, energy and other input costs; changes in the Company's management team or other key personnel; the Company's ability to realize the anticipated benefits from its cost savings initiatives; changes in relationships with significant customers and suppliers; the execution of the Company's international expansion strategy; tax law changes or interpretations; legal claims or other regulatory enforcement actions; product recalls or product liability claims; unanticipated business disruptions; the Company's ability to complete or realize the benefits from potential and completed acquisitions, alliances, divestitures or joint ventures; economic and political conditions in the United States and in various other nations in which we operate; the volatility of capital markets; increased pension, labor and people - related expenses; volatility in the market value of all or a portion of the derivatives we use; exchange rate fluctuations; risks associated with information technology and systems, including service interruptions, misappropriation of data or breaches of security; the Company's ability to protect intellectual property rights; impacts of natural events in the locations in which we or the Company's customers, suppliers or regulators operate; the Company's indebtedness and ability to pay such indebtedness; the Company's ownership structure; the impact of future sales of its common stock in the public markets; the Company's ability to continue to pay a regular dividend; changes in laws and regulations; restatements of the Company's consolidated financial statements; and other factors.

Federal government has not yet claimed the right to regulate digital currencies, thus deferring to each state taking its own positions on best practices and acceptable uses.

The court judgement explicitly states that Bitcoin demonstrates all the characteristics of a «property right», and hence a claim to transfer BTC under property rights is legitimate:

Detroit school students, represented by the Los Angeles - based public interest firm Public Counsel, filed suit last month against the state of Michigan, claiming a legal right to literacy based on the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

On the Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has been the most straightforward in arguing that Roe v. Wade is fundamentally wrong in claiming that there is a constitutional right to abortion, and that the Court is fundamentally wrong in trying to devise an abortion code to be applied to all the states.

Much of the Bible's propaganda against Princess Jezebel of Israel was done to discredit the Israeli kings and claim the kings of the relatively tiny state of Judah were, by right, the kings of Israel.

Welcome to the new Civil War, only this time instead of slave - owners hiding their avarice behind claims of state's rights, it's religious extremists who are doing that.

Muchembled explains both the development of dueling among the nobility and rural revolts against the centralization of authority as reactions against state repression of traditional codes of violence: «In each case, the participants claimed an eminent right to a straight fight, even if it resulted in the death of the adversary.»

it's no more speical than any other state in the world, it's just a clump of dirt that has been claimed by people that america dumped there after WW2; so i would say the palestinians have a right to upset that their land was invaded.

My article made note of old claims about the divine right of kings, not because I imagine such claims were true even in their own time, but because they at least offered a theory about why the state is justified in exercising power over life and death.

If the strongest creatures survive in nature, then is it not natural for the state to claim that might makes right?

Both claim to «know» that their belief is the right one, whereas I like to state that frankly, since there is inconclusive evidence for every theism in the world, there isn't enough proof that atheists are correct either.

- State claims of total ownership rights over the individual in the name of freedom through such devices as ID cards, racial and religious categorisation and so on.

«The Greens do have such rights,» Heaton's ruling stated, «but are unlikely to prevail as to their constitutional claims because the preventive care coverage regulations... are neutral laws of general applicability which are rationally related to a legitimate governmental objective.»

The revolutionaries who claim for themselves the right to use violence but deny it to the state, who demand that the state act correctly, in the light of love, justice, and the common weal, are guilty of hypocrisy (such as Mr. Debray exhibited during his trial).

When any religion, in this case islam, espouses ideas that are in direct conflict with the Constitution and openly work to impose an alien political / religious system called sharia on the United States, at some point the right to claim constitutional protection is lost.

The American Lutherans state that «a qualitative distinction must be made between [the fetus's] claims and the rights of a responsible person made in God's image who is living in relationships.»

You have every right to state your belief the «Jesus is Lord»... but if you do so others have every right to oppose that idea and claim.

They suggested three ways in which RFRA might conceivably be interpreted (misinterpreted, really) to create bad consequences: (1) to give a church's opponents legal «standing» (a technical term meaning the right to sue) to challenge the church's tax - exempt status; (2) to allow taxpayers to claim their free exercise rights would be violated if a religiously affiliated organization receives government assistance under a secular program; and, most importantly, (3) to allow pro-abortion plaintiffs to claim a free exercise right to abortion if Roe v. Wade is overruled and states enact anti-abortion laws.

Like the United States, Mexico fought a long and bitter civil war, a war in which ever inclusive rights to full citizenship were claimed and in principle at least were won.

When the nation was established as a democratic republic, the people of the former English colonies, acting in their various constitutional conventions, transferred all governing power to their states and to the federal government, reserving for themselves only certain rights and powers they previously claimed to enjoy as subjects of the British Crown.

«An aspiring president of the United States can brag about sexually assaulting women and still claim the backing of many if not most of the older stalwarts in the Religious Right.»

The council's response to that claim was that persons have rights, whether their religious opinions be erroneous or not, and that, in any event, states lack theological competence.

Rutherford was the inspiration for the twentieth - century theologian Francis Schaeffer, who claimed in his Christian Manifesto that «at a certain point there is not only the right, but the duty, to disobey the state.»

One claimed that «the main form of political terrorism in the United States is perpetuated by right wing opponents of abortion,» while another added that «most anti-abortion activists» are «religious fanatics who want to impose their version of God's word on the rest of us.»

Proof of this is found in answers to interrogatories C & C filed in connection with its Montana lawsuit, that asked its definition of a «terminally ill adult patient,» who the complaint claimed had a state constitutional right to assisted suicide.

Second, the critics of the religious right can not, in my opinion, claim that its political activities involve a violation of the separation of church and state.

The Protocol authorizes the UN Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications from individuals subject to its jurisdiction who claim to be victims of a violation by that State Party of any of the rights set forth in the CovRights Committee to receive and consider communications from individuals subject to its jurisdiction who claim to be victims of a violation by that State Party of any of the rights set forth in the Covrights set forth in the Covenant.

On the one hand, Israel is a state claiming all the rights and privileges of modern nations, so that no special conditions such as exceptional ethical requirements should be placed upon it.

Let me state that It started by establishing that we Christians are the church — it's not a building — there are 400 + Christians denominations all claiming to be right & that one should join their particular church & get with their program.

At the same time, he claims that, whatever the remaining ambiguities concerning the conflict between Israel's rights and the rights of Palestinians, they can be morally interpreted in favor of Israel, because the State of Israel is necessary for Jewish existence.

It remains laissez - faire in its approach to social welfare and justice, and justifies this stance by claiming the state has no ability (rather than no right or no reason) to intervene in such matters.

In Obergefell, Kennedy's claim was that although historically the interpretation of a fundamental right to marry has not included same - sex couples, the «referenda, legislative debates, and grassroots campaigns; studies and other writings; and extensive litigation in state and federal courts» has led to an «enhanced understanding» of how the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the 14th amendment contain a right for same - sex couples to marry that was really there all along, though until now unseen.

The church, which claims 15,000 regular attendees, posted a news release on its website stating that Schaap was dismissed «due to a sin that has caused him to forfeit his right to be our pastor.

The court found that the plaintiff had a private right of action under Illinois state law and the identical federal law did not apply to preempt the state law claim.

We expect to see more consumer fraud claims based on the violation of state labeling statutes given that courts are increasingly finding a private right of action under state law concerning the FDA's labeling requirements.

Although many of these claims challenge the veracity of «organic,» «healthy,» and «100 %» claims on labels, several states are affording new opportunities to attack ingredient labels — an area that federal courts have traditionally found to be preempted (barred) by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with no private right of action for individual citizens.

However, in the report a Barcelona spokesperson stated that no approach for Aurier was ever made, which inevitably throws into doubt the credibility of the right - back's claims.

Any comments, materials, or letters sent by you to momstown regarding the Web Site, including, without limitation, questions, comments, suggestions, criticisms, or the like («Received Materials») shall be deemed to be nonconfidential and free of any claims of proprietary or personal rights unless you explicitly state in the correspondence that the letter (i) is «not for publication» and (ii) contains «private and proprietary» information that may not be distributed.

We are unable to reconcile our claim of a free democratic state in which the rights of citizens are paramount with such excessive censure of the right to free expression.

The first came from Chris Cox's campaign, which released an «unsolicited» letter it received from former New Jersey GOP Chairwoman Virginia Newmann Littell, who questions Randy Altschuler's conservative credentials and says he claimed to favor abortion rights several years ago when he contacted her to inquire about running for Congress in the Garden State.

In this respect, Europe is on the right path establishing budgetary restrictions for those states claiming funds from the ESM or violating the fiscal compact.

An aide to State Representative Shawn Harrison of Florida was fired after claiming falsely that two students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School were «actors that travel to various crisis when they happen» — a common far - right conspiracy theory after mass shootings.

An obvious example of the pre-right claim would be the French Revolution; a clear example of the post right claim would be the civil rights campaign conducted by Martin Luther King Jr. in the United States in the 1960s.

The Spanish state has been suffering from a deep crisis for several years, as Basque and Catalan claims for the «right to decide» have clearly illustrated.

It is right to claim that actions are now being taken that are both in the interests of Western powers and that undermine the sovereignty of African states; but to frame them in «colonial» terms is inflammatory and risks becoming associated with statements from less well - meaning leaders.