This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In Delaware v. Supreme Court held that uncashed MoneyGram checks are governed by the Disposition of Abandoned Money Orders and Traveler’s Check Act (FDA) and should be returned to the state where they were issued. The post Delaware Loses Bid to Keep Uncashed MoneyGram Checks appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter.
Below is a brief summary of the cases before the Court: Delaware v. McDonough: The case involves whether the doctrine of equitable tolling applies to a statute governing veteran benefits. The post SCOTUS Kicks Off Term With Oral Arguments in Four Cases appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter.
The amendment was introduced by the delegates representing Delaware and initially only protected sex. But the Convention came together to declare that equal rights, including rights for women and LGBTQ+ people, should be a fundamental value of American constitutionallaw. It was in response to the Supreme Court decision Kelo v.
We recently discussed the rise of a generation of censors as young people embrace the role of government and corporate censorship. ” The shift is almost entirely among Democrats who ( like Democratic leaders ) now overwhelming favor fewer free speech protections and more government control over speech. .”
Delaware, Hawaii and Idaho were among the 12 states and territories where no officers reportedly died. “As As we had feared, the virus has claimed the lives of many, and now includes a growing number of law enforcement officers,” the release reads. Regarding vaccine mandates, the FOP is staying true to its members’ wishes.
Biden that administration officials “likely violated” the First Amendment and issued a preliminary injunction banning the government from communicating with social media companies to limit speech. California has long sought to impose speech limits on doctors , businesses , and citizens to silence opposing viewpoints.
But Chief Judge Colm Connolly, a Delaware Democrat, didn’t just say it was legally unfounded — he demolished the claims of figures like Jankowicz that they are really not engaged in censorship. Millions of government and private dollars are flowing to universities and organizations engaged in targeting or blacklisting individuals and groups.
The man who uttered those words was the senator from Delaware: Joe Biden. While the Senate had long maintained that a qualified nominee would be confirmed despite his judicial philosophy, that changed with Bork. Biden has now made his first nomination as President. Democrats insisted, in the words of Rep. Ted Kennedy (D.,
Delaware Sen. The First Amendment is premised on the belief that this right is essential to protecting the other freedoms in the Constitution. It is the right that allows people to challenge their government and others on electoral issues, public health issues, and other controversies. Chris Coons, however, was not happy.
It is the latest example of Democrat’s embracing a type of corporate governance model to carry out tasks barred to the government under the Constitution. That corporate governance model was on display this month when Sen. Delaware Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass.,
2111 (2022), the Supreme Court held that [W]hen the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. To justify its regulation, the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.
Once again, voters preferred divided government with a Congress willing and able to challenge a president rather than remain a pure pedestrian in the exercise of governance. As those institutional gears engage, checks and balances will again force greater accountability and exposure in the constitutional system.
States like Colorado, New Jersey, Oregon and Delaware actually protected abortion without any limit on the stage of a pregnancy — guaranteeing the right up to just before time of birth. It will be difficult for states to interfere with such prescriptions, particularly if the federal government protects such access. How we have changed.
That effort succeeded largely with the help of an alliance with the media, which showed little interest in whether the President was actually running the government. As I previously discussed, the issue of disability of a president was briefly raised in the Constitutional Convention in 1787.
Here is the column: In 2024, the greatest test for our Constitution may be whether it can survive the “Defenders of Democracy.” Ronald Reagan often said , “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the government and I’m here to help.” Fortunately, our democracy does not depend on any president.
The Trump indictment details alleged efforts to conceal documents, obstruct the investigation and lie to the government. to his home and his garage in Delaware. Jonathan Turley, an attorney, constitutionallaw scholar and legal analyst, is the Shapiro Chair for Public Interest Law at The George Washington University Law School.
If there is a bedrock principle underly- ing the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.” Such speech cannot be restricted simply because it is upsetting or arouses contempt. “If Johnson, 491 U. 397, 414 (1989).
While even stalwart Biden allies like Delaware Sen. Now, the MSNBC contributor and Grio White House correspondent has declared that President Joe Biden was a standard-bearer for what the Founding Fathers put in place. The reason? His much-criticized and partisan veto of The Judges Act.
At the time, figures such as the University of Chicago’s Eric Posner argued that the “conventional understanding” of the amendment should be “enlarged” to include instances where both parties “lose confidence in the president’s ability to govern.” John Dickinson’s question was left unanswered in the final version of the Constitution.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content