Unit 6 Examples

UDHR- Article 11

(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense. (2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed. *Extended clause of the magna carta* http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/

AAAAAAAAAAAA

*Hello my nqame ios

Marbury v Madison

...

Typical Citizenship Test Questions (OMG THESE ARE SO EASY) Called the The United States Citizenship and Immigration Cervices

1. What are the colors of our flag? 2. How many stars are there in our flag? 3. What color are the stars on our flag? 4. What do the stars on the flag mean? 5. How many stripes are there in the flag? 6. What color are the stripes? 7. What do the stripes on the flag mean? 8. How many states are there in the union? 9. What is the 4th of July? 10. What is the date of Independence Day? The United States Citizenship and Immigration Cervices (USCIS) redesigned its naturalization test in 2008, concentrating on wider civic concepts rather than facts. Applicants must correctly answer six of ten questions drawn from a pool of 100.

Technology and Voting Con

A letter written to the Maryland State Board of Elections in October 2012 by J. Alex Halderman, David Jefferson and Barbara Simons urging them to take immediate steps to better protect a new system that allows Marylanders to update their voter registration online. While expressing their strong support the goal of using the Internet to increase the convenience of voter registration and registration changes for both voters and election officials, the authors identified severe security vulnerabilities in Maryland's online voter registration system. These problems leave the system open to large-scale, automated fraud, and make the Maryland system among the most vulnerable of all the states' new online voter registration systems. The letter recommended defensive steps for immediate implementation, as well as additional safeguards for implementation as soon as possible after the election.

Plyler v Doe (1982)

A revision to the Texas education laws in 1975 allowed the state to withhold from local school districts state funds for educating children of illegal aliens. This case was decided together with Texas v. Certain Named and Unnamed Alien Child. he Court reasoned that illegal aliens and their children, though not citizens of the United States or Texas, are people "in any ordinary sense of the term" and, therefore, are afforded Fourteenth Amendment protections. Since the state law severely disadvantaged the children of illegal aliens, by denying them the right to an education, and because Texas could not prove that the regulation was needed to serve a "compelling state interest," the Court struck down the law.

Syrian Refugee Crisis- National vs State government

AUSTIN, Texas — Texas on Wednesday sued the U.S. government in an effort to block six Syrian refugees from resettling in Dallas this week. The lawsuit comes after the nonprofit International Rescue Committee said it would place Syrian refugees in Texas over the objections of Republican Gov. Greg Abbott. Texas, citing security concerns, is seeking to delay the arrival of the refugees for at least a week, until a federal judge can hear the challenge. The Obama administration has said states don't have the authority to block refugees. The IRC, which was also named in the lawsuit, has repeatedly noted that Syrian refugees are the most security-vetted group of people who come into the U.S. The Obama administration says that vetting is thorough and can take up to two years.

Russian Government

After the end of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev became the president of Russian however after a year into a term soviet republic supporters held a coup against the president. Boris Yeltsin created support against Gorbachev's presidency and many republics declared independence. During the Belavezha Accords the USSR was replaced by the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) and Gorbachev resigned allowing Yeltsin to become the president. In 1993 Yeltsin pushed for reforms to the 1978 constitution that would allow for more executive power. Yeltsin was able to dissolve parliament in 1993 and gathered a constitutional assembly who created a new system with a strong executive. The 1993 constitution made Russia a democratic, federative, law-based state with a republican form of government. This constitution divided state power between legislative, executive, and judicial branches. It established the ability of the people to hold a diversity of religions and outlawed any forced ideologies. It established a dual executive of a president and a prime minister. The president has the power to deal with foreign affairs, The presidency was criticized as being too dictatorial and Yeltsin defended the strong executive saying that a parliament does not have the power to act. The president has power over the military as well. The president serves for four years and can only serve 2 terms. The Law on Presidential Elections (1995) establishes that for a candidate to register for the election they must have 1 million signatures and 50 percent of eligible voters participate in order for a presidential election to be valid. The law continues saying that for someone to become the president they must have at least 50% of the vote to be elected. if one person does not receive more that 50% a runoff election will be held between the top two candidates held within 15 days. voters can mark for who they do not want and a candidate can win without a majority. The prime minister controls the cabinet consisting of ministers. The ministries of the Government Execute credit and monetary policies and defense, foreign policy, and state security functions; ensure the rule of law and respect for human and civil rights; protect property; take measures against crimes, and formulates the state budget, submits it to the State Duma, and issues a report on its implementation. The federal assembly consists of the State Duma (lower house) and the Federal Council. The Federation Council works on subnational jurisdictions, such as adjustments to internal borders and decrees of the president establishing martial law or states of emergency,it has responsibilities in confirming and removing the procurator general and confirming justices,and and they examine bills passed by the lower chamber dealing with budgetary, tax, and other fiscal measures, as well as issues dealing with war and peace and with treaty ratification. The state Duma controls all bills , can establish a no confidence vote and appoints the prime minister.

What does the Magna Carta say?

Although Magna Carta contained 63 clauses when it was first granted, only three of those clauses remain part of English law. One defends the liberties and rights of the English Church, another confirms the liberties and customs of London and other towns, but the third is the most famous: This clause gave all free men the right to justice and a fair trial. However, 'free men' comprised only a small proportion of the population in medieval England. The majority of the people were unfree peasants known as 'villeins', who could seek justice only through the courts of their own lords. Buried deep in Magna Carta, this clause was given no particular prominence in 1215, but its intrinsic adaptability has allowed succeeding generations to reinterpret it for their own purposes. In the 14th century Parliament saw it as guaranteeing trial by jury; in the 17th century Sir Edward Coke (1552-1634) interpreted it as a declaration of individual liberty in his conflict with the early Stuart kings; and it has echoes in the American Bill of Rights (1791) and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). Much of the remainder of Magna Carta dealt with specific grievances regarding the ownership of land, the regulation of the justice system, and medieval taxes with no modern equivalent (such as 'scutage' and 'socage'). It demanded the removal of fish weirs from the Thames, the Medway and throughout England; the dismissal of several royal servants; the standardisation of various weights and measures; and so on. Magna Carta stated that no taxes could be demanded without the 'general consent of the realm', meaning the leading barons and churchmen. It re-established privileges which had been lost, and it linked fines to the severity of the offence so as not to threaten an individual's livelihood. It also confirmed that a widow could not be forced to remarry against her wishes.

Magna Carta Article 42

Any man can leave and return without fear if: he maintains his allegiance, its for a short time, its during war, or its for the common good of the realm

Belarus and Lukashenko

Belarus has been ruled with an increasingly iron fist since 1994 by President Alexander Lukashenko. Opposition figures are subjected to harsh penalties for organizing protests. In early 2005, Belarus was listed by the US as Europe's only remaining "outpost of tyranny". In late 2008, there were some signs of a slight easing of tensions with the West, though this proved to be only a temporary thaw. The country became independent in 1991, following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Two decades later, the sense of national identity is weak, international isolation continues and the nature of political links with Russia remains a key issue. In the Soviet post-war years, Belarus became one of the most prosperous parts of the USSR, but with independence came economic decline. President Lukashenko has steadfastly opposed the privatisation of state enterprises. Private business is virtually non-existent. Foreign investors stay away. The economic situation deteriorated drastically in the summer of 2011 when a balance of payments crisis drained the country's hard-currency reserves. The government's efforts to re-peg the official exchange rate and freeze the price of staple foodstuffs failed to impress either Russia or the International Monetary Fund, to both of which Belarus appealed for assistance. Belarus presents only a smidgen of the anti-press record of President Aleksandr Lukashenko. He has also banned broadcasts, supported libel suits against journalists and withheld reports on government corruption. The post office was ordered to stop delivering three independent newspapers, and five independent newspapers were banned from using the state-run printing plant. Even when the newspapers are permitted to publish, censorship is constant.

Current Examples of Civil Disobedience

Chicago- Laquan McDonald and police officer Van Dyke (explained in violations of rule of law in the US) Ferguson protests

Violations of RofL in the police force

Civil forfeiture in the United States, sometimes called civil judicial forfeiture, is a controversial legal process in which law enforcement officers take assets from persons suspected of involvement with crime or illegal activity without necessarily charging the owners with wrongdoing. According to a new report on asset forfeiture from the Institute for Justice, police seized $4.5 billion in cash and property through civil forfeiture last year. That exceeds the $3.9 billion worth of property stolen in burglaries during the same period. The valuation of burglary proceeds is from the FBI's annual Uniform Crime Report. Take Charles Clarke. Clarke, a 24-year-old college student, was relieved of $11,000 in cash by federal agents at the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport after a ticket agent reportedly told them he smelled like marijuana. They stopped and searched him at the airport, found no drugs or other banned items and never charged him with a crime, but they took his money. Police brutality Chicago police Officer Jason Van Dyke has been charged with first-degree murder in the October 2014 slaying of McDonald, who suffered multiple gunshot wounds to his chest, scalp, neck, back, arms and right hand and leg in the shooting in the 4100 block of South Pulaski Road. The first two officers on the scene trailed McDonald for nearly a half-mile, from a trucking yard where he had been breaking into vehicles through a Burger King parking lot and onto busy Pulaski Road. As officers awaited backup units armed with Tasers, they tried to corral McDonald to keep him away from passers-by. At one point, McDonald used the knife to slash the front tire of a squad car trying to block his path. Police said McDonald, who had PCP in his system when he died, was behaving erratically and refusing police commands to drop the folding knife. At the time of the shooting, the police union maintained that the officer fired in fear for his life because the teen lunged at him and his partner with the knife In response to this Seeking to calm growing criticism about his administration's handling of police misconduct cases, Mayor Rahm Emanuel has appointed a new "police accountability task force. In a press release, the mayor's office said the task force "will review the system of accountability, training and oversight that is currently in place for Chicago's police officers."

The US inspires the French's first constitution after the revolution

Constitution of 1791, French constitution created by the National Assembly during the French Revolution. It retained the monarchy, but sovereignty effectively resided in the Legislative Assembly, which was elected by a system of indirect voting. The franchise was restricted to "active" citizens who paid a minimal sum in taxes; about two-thirds of adult men had the right to vote for electors and to choose certain local officials directly. The constitution lasted less than a year. On the day of the Tennis Court Oath, the National Assembly had declared that it would not disband until a new constitution had been created for France. They completed their task in 1791. The new constitution created by these moderate revolutionaries declared France to be a constitutional monarchy. Within this new government, all legislative powers went to a single Legislative Assembly, which alone had the power to declare war and raise taxes. The Legislative Assembly was an indirectly elected body. It was made up of representatives selected by Electors, who themselves were elected by "active" citizens. An active citizen was a male citizen who paid annual taxes equal to the local wages paid for three days of labor. About two thirds of the male citizens were able to vote. Only a small number qualified to serve as either electors or members of the Legislative Assembly. The monarch had only limited powers. He could temporarily stop legislation with a suspensive veto, but he could not veto anything permanently. He had no control of the army, or any authority over local government. He had no voice in the new Legislative Assembly. The constitution lasted only one year. Even as the constitution was created, the revolution was turning in a more radical direction.

Magna Carta Article 20

Crimes will have proportional punishments, however the punishments cannot strip someone of their livelihood. Punishments can be avoided by the mercy of a royal court.

Magna Carta Article 11

Debts (particularly to Jews) after the death of a man shall not fall on the women or children, but paid out of the residue and service to feudal lords

Early 19th century voting

During the first half of the nineteenth century, the election process changed dramatically. Voting by voice was replaced by voting by written ballot. This was not the same thing as a secret ballot, which was instituted only in the late nineteenth century; parties printed ballots on colored paper, so that it was still possible to determine who had voted for which candidate. The most significant political innovation of the early nineteenth century was the abolition of property qualifications for voting and officeholding. Hard times resulting from the Panic of 1819 led many people to demand an end to property restrictions on voting and officeholding. In 1800, just three states (Kentucky, New Hampshire, and Vermont) had universal white manhood suffrage. By 1830, ten states permitted white manhood suffrage without qualification. Eight states restricted the vote to taxpayers, and six imposed a property qualification for suffrage. In 1860, just five states limited suffrage to taxpayers and only two still imposed property qualifications. And after 1840, a number of states, mainly in the Midwest, allowed immigrants who intended to become citizens to vote. Pressure for expansion of voting rights came from propertyless men; from territories eager to attract settlers; and from political parties seeking to broaden their base. Ironically, the period that saw the advent of universal white manhood suffrage also saw new restrictions imposed on voting by African Americans. Every new state that joined the Union after 1819 explicitly denied blacks the right to vote. In 1855, only five states—Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont—allowed African Americans to vote without significant restrictions. In 1826, only sixteen black New Yorkers were qualified to vote. The era of universal white manhood suffrage also saw other restrictions on voting. In New Jersey, the one state that had allowed women property holders to vote, women lost the right to vote. Twelve states forbade paupers from voting and two dozen states excluded felons. After 1830, interest in voting registration increased. There were also some attempts to impose literacy tests and prolonged residence requirements (ranging up to twenty-one years) in the 1850s.

Enlightened Self Interest

Enlightened self-interest is a philosophy in ethics which states that persons who act to further the interests of others (or the interests of the group or groups to which they belong), ultimately serve their own self-interest. Created by Alexis de Tocqueville.

UDHR article 3

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person

UCHR article 6

Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Crosby v. National Foreign Trade Council (2000)

Facts of the Case: In 1996, the Massachusetts Burma Law, which restricted state entities from buying goods or services from companies doing business with Burma, was passed. Afterwards, Congress also imposed mandatory and conditional sanctions on Burma. Businesses with ties to Burma landed on Massachusetts' "restricted trade" list. The list came to include 34 members of the National Foreign Trade Council (Council), a non-profit advocate for American companies that do business abroad. The Council filed suit against Stephen Crosby, the Massachusetts Secretary of Administration and Finance, and other state officials in federal court, claiming that the state act unconstitutionally infringes on the federal foreign affairs power, violates the Foreign Commerce Clause, and is preempted by the Federal Burma Law. The district court permanently barred enforcement of the state act, and the appellate court affirmed. The court also found that the Massachusetts Burma Law violated the Supremacy Clause because the state was acting in an area of unique federal concern, foreign policy, through a balanced, tailored approach. Question: Is the Massachusetts Burma Law, which restricts the authority of its agencies to purchase goods or services from companies doing business with Burma, unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause? Conclusion: Yes. In a opinion delivered by Justice David H. Souter, the Court held that "the state Act is preempted, and its application unconstitutional, under the Supremacy Clause." Justice Souter wrote for the Court that Massachusetts's law created an obstacle to the President's discretion to control economic sanctions against Burma, interfered with Congress's intention to limit economic pressure against the Burmese Government, and was at odds with the President's authority to speak for the United States among the world's nations to develop a comprehensive, multilateral Burma strategy. Therefore, the Massachusetts Burma Law "is invalid under the Supremacy Clause...owing to its threat of frustrating federal statutory objectives."

Missouri v. Holland (1920)

Facts of the Case: In December 1916, the United States and Great Britain entered into a treaty to protect a number of migratory birds in the U.S. and Canada. Congress passed the Migratory Bird Treaty Act in 1918 in order to facilitate enforcement of the treaty. When Ray P. Holland, the U.S. Game Warden, threatened to arrest citizens of Missouri for violating the act, the state of Missouri challenged the treaty. Question: Did the treaty infringe upon rights reserved to the states by the Tenth Amendment? Conclusion: No. In a 7-to-2 decision, the Court held that the national interest in protecting the wildlife could be protected only by national action. The Court noted that the birds the government sought to protect had no permanent habitats within individual states and argued that "but for the treaty and the statute there soon might be no birds for any powers to deal with." The Court thus upheld the exercise of the treaty power and thus found no violation of the Tenth Amendment.

Buckley v. Valeo (1976)

Facts of the Case: In the wake of the Watergate affair, Congress attempted to ferret out corruption in political campaigns by restricting financial contributions to candidates. Among other things, the law set limits on the amount of money an individual could contribute to a single campaign and it required reporting of contributions above a certain threshold amount. The Federal Election Commission was created to enforce the statute. Question: Did the limits placed on electoral expenditures by the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, and related provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, violate the First Amendment's freedom of speech and association clauses? Conclusion: In this complicated case, the Court arrived at two important conclusions. First, it held that restrictions on individual contributions to political campaigns and candidates did not violate the First Amendment since the limitations of the FECA enhance the "integrity of our system of representative democracy" by guarding against unscrupulous practices. Second, the Court found that governmental restriction of independent expenditures in campaigns, the limitation on expenditures by candidates from their own personal or family resources, and the limitation on total campaign expenditures did violate the First Amendment. Since these practices do not necessarily enhance the potential for corruption that individual contributions to candidates do, the Court found that restricting them did not serve a government interest great enough to warrant a curtailment on free speech and association.

Women's Civil Disobedience

Four years into their campaign and shortly before the United States entered World War I, National Women's Party strategists realized that they needed to escalate their pressure and adopt more aggressive tactics. Most important among these was picketing at the White House-a concerted action that lasted for many months and led to the arrest and imprisonment of many NWP activists. The willingness of NWP pickets to be arrested, their campaign for recognition as political prisoners rather than as criminals, and their acts of civil disobedience in jail-including hunger strikes and the retaliatory force-feedings by authorities-shocked the nation and brought attention and support to their cause. Through constant agitation, the NWP effectively compelled President Wilson to support a federal woman suffrage amendment. Similar pressure on national and state legislators led to congressional approval of the 19th Amendment in June 1919 and ratification 14 months later by three-fourths of the states.

Fast and Furious Operation (2012)

From 2009 - 2011, under Operation Fast and Furious, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Phoenix Field Division, along with other partners, allowed illegal gun sales, believed to be destined for Mexican drug cartels, in order to track the sellers and purchasers. An estimated 1,400 weapons were lost by the ATF in Mexico. Two of the missing weapons linked to the operation turned up at the Arizona murder scene of United States Border Patrol agent Brian Terry. Whistle-blowing leads to a Congressional investigation by the Senate Judiciary Committee and the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, and Attorney General Eric Holder is cited for contempt. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee recommends that Attorney General Holder be cited for contempt of Congress for failing to turn over documents relating to the Fast and Furious operation. President Barack Obama asserts executive privilege over the documents sought by the investigating committee. This prevents future prosecution of Holder.

Greenpeace

Greenpeace is an independent global campaigning organisation that acts to change attitudes and behaviour, to protect and conserve the environment and to promote peace. Greenpeace is present in more than 55 countries across Europe, the Americas, Asia, Africa and the Pacific. To maintain its independence, Greenpeace does not accept donations from governments or corporations but relies on contributions from individual supporters and foundation grants. Greenpeace has been campaigning against environmental degradation since 1971 when a small boat of volunteers and journalists sailed into Amchitka, an area north of Alaska where the US Government was conducting underground nuclear tests. This tradition of 'bearing witness' in a non-violent manner continues today, and our ships are an important part of all our campaign work. L'Oreal committing to a No Deforestation policy in 2014 to public pressure from NGOs and consumers.

The Magna Carta and Rule of Law

In 1215, civil war in England between powerful barons and King John ended when the barons forced the king to sign a document called Magna Carta (Great Charter). The charter set out the feudal rights of the barons and stated that the king could continue to rule but must keep to the established laws and customs of the land. It was the first written document compelling an English king to act according to the rule of law. Some of the more general rights and liberties in the charter have become part of the English and American constitutions and have influenced democratic government throughout the world. 1214-1215 Uprising of feudal barons (aristocrats) in England after John loses English lands in France to French (Battle of Bouvine). Barons want to secure their feudal rights and stop arbitrary rule of king. 1215 John is forced by his barons (who have church and public support) to agree to Magna Carta at Runnymede (beside River Thames near London), but he goes back on his word soon after.

Crawford v Marion County Election Board (2005)

In 2005, the Indiana legislature passed a law requiring all voters who cast a ballot in person to present a photo I.D. issued by the United States or the state of Indiana. Plaintiffs including the local Democratic Party and interest groups representing minority and elderly citizens argued that the law constituted an undue burden on the right to vote. At trial, the plaintiffs did not produce any witnesses who claimed they would be unable to meet the law's requirements. The district court and the court of appeals both upheld the law. However, the three-judge appellate panel was deeply divided. Dissenting judge Terrence Evans claimed that the law was a thinly-veiled attempt to dampen turnout by those likely to vote for Democratic candidates. No. By 6-3 vote, the Court upheld the law, concluding that the photo I.D. requirement was closely related to Indiana's legitimate state interests in preventing voter fraud. The slight burden the law imposed on voters' rights did not outweigh these interests, which the Court characterized as "neutral and nondiscriminatory." Although there was no majority opinion, the Court's decision included concurring opinions written by Justices John Paul Stevens and Antonin Scalia. Justices David Souter and Stephen Breyer each wrote dissenting opinions. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined Justice Souter's dissent.

A letter from Birmingham Jail

In Birmingham between 1957 and 1962 seventeen black churches and homes had been bombed, including the home of Shuttlesworth, who campaigned actively for civil rights. Although the population of Birmingham was 40% African American, there seemed little hope for a political solution to the racial divide: of 80,000 registered voters, only 10,000 were black. The campaign began on 3 April with lunch-counter sit-ins. On 6 April, protestors marched on City Hall, and forty-two people were arrested. Demonstrations occurred each day thereafter. While the jails filled with peaceful blacks, King negotiated with white businessmen, whose stores were losing business due to the protests. Although some of these businessmen were willing to consider desegregating their facilities and hiring African Americans, City officials held fast to segregationist policies. On 10 April, these officials obtained an injunction prohibiting the demonstrations. Unlike the injunction in Albany, Georgia, however, this one came from a state court, not a federal one. King felt comfortable violating such an injunction, on the grounds of adhering to the federal laws with which it was at odds. Getting the other leaders of the campaign to violate the injunction, however, took some convincing by King, especially as many of the clergy felt bound to be in the pulpit-and not in jail-on the following Sunday, which was Easter. But King succeeded in persuading them to his cause, and personally led a march on Good Friday, 12 April. All protestors were quickly arrested. Birmingham police separated King and Abernathy, placing each in solitary confinement, and denying each man his rightful phone-calls to the outside world. King spent eight days in his cell. During that time he composed his "Letter from a Birmingham Jail." While changes in local policies constituted the Birmingham campaign's immediate outcome, the effort's long-term effects were felt nation-wide. In the weeks that followed, tensions flared, and protests commenced in scores of Southern cities. King's fame as a civil rights leader was redoubled. And on 11 June, President Kennedy voiced his commitment to federal civil rights legislation. He had been holding off, preoccupied by the Cold War, but Birmingham had pressed the issue. Kennedy's commitment culminated in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which was signed into law by Lyndon Johnson after Kennedy's assassination. The act mandated federally what had in Birmingham been won locally: a white commitment to desegregation and equal employment opportunities. It also gave the federal government power to enforce desegregation laws in schools by withholding funds from noncompliant districts.

Rousseau and civic education

In Emile or on education by Rousseau - The system of education Rousseau proposes details a specific pedagogy for each stage of life, an educational method that corresponds with the particular characteristics of that stage of human development.

Worcester v Georgia (1832)

In September 1831, Samuel A. Worcester and several others, all non-Native Americans, were indicted in the Gwinnett county supreme court in Georgia for "residing within the limits of the Cherokee nation without a license" and "without having taken the oath to support and defend the constitution and laws of the state of Georgia." They were indicted under an 1830 act of the Georgia legislature titled, "an act to prevent the exercise of assumed and arbitrary power by all persons, under pretext of authority from the Cherokee Indians." Worcester argued that the state could not maintain the prosecution because the statute violated the Constitution, treaties between the United States and the Cherokee nation, and an act of Congress titled, "an act to regulate trade and intercourse with the Indian tribes." Worcester was convicted and sentenced to "hard labour in the penitentiary for four years." In an opinion delivered by Chief Justice John Marshall, the Court held that the Georgia act under which Worcester was prosecuted violated the Constitution, treaties, and laws of the United States. Noting that the "treaties and laws of the United States contemplate the Indian territory as completely separated from that of the states; and provide that all intercourse with them shall be carried on exclusively by the government of the union," Chief Justice Marshall argued, "The Cherokee nation, then, is a distinct community occupying its own territory in which the laws of Georgia can have no force. The whole intercourse between the United States and this nation, is, by our constitution and laws, vested in the government of the United States." The Georgia act thus interfered with the federal government's authority and was unconstitutional. Justice Henry Baldwin dissented for procedural reasons and on the merits.

Federalist 51

James Madison begins his famous federalist paper by explaining that the purpose of this essay is to help the readers understand how the structure of the proposed government makes liberty possible. Each branch should be, in Madison's opinion, mostly independent. To assure such independence, no one branch should have too much power in selecting members of the other two branches. If this principle were strictly followed, it would mean that the citizens should select the president, the legislators, and the judges. But the framers recognized certain practical difficulties in making every office elective. In particular, the judicial branch would suffer because the average person is not aware of the qualifications judges should possess. Judges should have great ability, but also be free of political pressures. Since federal judges are appointed for life, their thinking will not be influenced by the president who appoints them, nor the senators whose consent the president will seek.

What is lobbying

Lobbying means the deliberate attempt to influence political decisions through various forms of advocacy directed at policymakers on behalf of another person, organization or group

What was the long-term impact of Magna Carta?

Magna Carta is sometimes regarded as the foundation of democracy in England. In fact, most of its terms applied only to a small proportion of the population in 1215, and the implementation of the charter in subsequent centuries remained open to the interpretation of the courts. Revised versions of Magna Carta were issued by King Henry III (in 1216, 1217 and 1225), and the text of the 1225 version was entered onto the statute roll in 1297. Magna Carta had limited the circumstances under which the King could raise money without the consent of the people. The 1225 version of Magna Carta had been granted explicitly in return for a payment of tax by the whole kingdom, and this paved the way for the first summons of Parliament in 1265, to approve the granting of taxation. In the 17th century, opponents of King Charles I (1625-49) used Magna Carta to regulate the arbitrary use of royal authority. Sir Edward Coke, declared that 'Magna Carta is such a fellow, that he will have no sovereign', and in 1628 he helped to draft the Petition of Right, which limited royal power and made explicit reference to Magna Carta. When King Charles was himself put on trial in 1649, it was argued that his attempts to halt the proceedings contravened the clause of Magna Carta which prohibited the delay of justice. Magna Carta has consequently acquired a special status as the cornerstone of English liberties. This is despite the fact that the vast majority of its clauses have now been repealed, or in some cases superseded by other legislation such as the Human Rights Act (1998). Magna Carta nonetheless retains enormous symbolic power as an ancient defence against arbitrary and tyrannical rulers, and as a guarantor of individual liberties.

What is the Magna Carta

Magna Carta, meaning 'The Great Charter', is one of the most famous documents in the world. Originally issued by King John of England (r.1199-1216) as a practical solution to the political crisis he faced in 1215, Magna Carta established for the first time the principle that everybody, including the king, was subject to the law. Although nearly a third of the text was deleted or substantially rewritten within ten years, and almost all the clauses have been repealed in modern times, Magna Carta remains a cornerstone of the British constitution. Most of the 63 clauses granted by King John dealt with specific grievances relating to his rule. However, buried within them were a number of fundamental values that both challenged the autocracy of the king and proved highly adaptable in future centuries. Most famously, the 39th clause gave all 'free men' the right to justice and a fair trial. Some of Magna Carta's core principles are echoed in the United States Bill of Rights (1791) and in many other constitutional documents around the world, as well as in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and the European Convention on Human Rights (1950).

Gerrymandering definition

Manipulate the boundaries of (an electoral constituency) so as to favor one party or class.

Popular sovereignty

Means that the people have ultimate governing authority, which carries with it the responsibility to exercise that authority knowledgeably to balance individual interests and the common good. Protection of individual rights requires people to be guardians of their own rights and to be willing to defend the rights of other

Corruption in Mexico

Mexico's human rights crisis has drawn international attention repeatedly in recent years. Some 100,000 people have died in drug-related violence since former President Felipe Calderón launched an assault on the country's cartels in 2006, prompting a spike in Mexican asylum claims in the United States. More recently, Mexican police attacked a group of students in Iguala several times during the night of Sept. 26, 2014, killing six people, wounding several and abducting 43. Then-Attorney General of Mexico Jesus Murillo Karam said in November that police handed the missing students over to four accused members of the Guerreros Unidos drug cartel, who confessed to killing the students that night and incinerating their bodies at a trash dump in the neighboring town of Cocula. Then-Attorney General of Mexico Jesus Murillo Karam said in November that police handed the missing students over to four accused members of the Guerreros Unidos drug cartel, who confessed to killing the students that night and incinerating their bodies at a trash dump in the neighboring town of Cocula. Currently, the United States government funds Mexico's security forces through "Plan Mexico" (The Merida Initiative and other bilateral initiatives), providing over $2 billion since 2008. Given the high degree of Mexican government and security force complicity and participation in human rights abuses, we have reason to believe that U.S. aid has been used to perpetrate the very human rights violations it is supposed to prevent.

Features of American history and culture have contributed to the effectiveness of the pres. system, sep of powers, and federalism in the united states.

Montesque and separation of powers Maribury v Madison Federalist 51

Should we use human rights as a form of foreign policy

Natural Rights apply to all people not just in the united states.

Rule of Law and Natural rights

Natural rights are found in the constitution. According to to the supremacy clause in article VI paragraph two, the constitution is established as the higher law. Since these rights are outlined in the constitution the rule of law protects citizens rights because everyone must follow the same laws. Relation to the Human Declaration of Rights

UDHR article 4

No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

UDHR article 5

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Magna Carta Article 23

No town or person shall be forced to build bridges over rivers except those with an ancient obligation to do so.

UDHR article 2

Nothing should restrict any rights in this declaration including sex, race, political associations nationality, etc.

Technology and Voting Pro

Often referred to as electronic voting machines (EVMs), DRE systems use a keyboard, touch-screen, mouse, pen or other electronic device to allow a voter to record his or her vote electronically. DREs are used in non-remote, supervised locations (polling stations). The DRE system captures the voter's choices and stores an electronic record of their vote in the machine. The data captured by each individual DRE unit is then transmitted by either electronic means (i.e., Internet, cellular network or memory card) or manually (i.e., by printing the results from each machine and tabulating them) to capture the total number of votes cast for specific parties or candidates. DRE systems may or may not produce a paper record to allow the voter to verify their voting choices. This paper record, also called a voter verified paper audit trail (VVPAT), has been implemented in multiple ways in different countries.

Justice Scalia's Argument's

On Obergefell v Hodges f you believe in democracy, you should put it to the people," he said. In a blistering dissent to the court's 5-to-4 decision in June that the Constitution protects the right of gay couples to marry, Scalia said such decisions should be up to the people and their representatives. On Monday, he said, "The notion that everything you care a lot about has to be in the Constitution is a very dangerous notion." He said, "It begins with stuff that we all agree upon...and at the bottom of that slope is same-sex marriage."

Pardoning of Nixon

On September 8, 1974, one month after President Richard Nixon resigned the presidency amid the Watergate scandal, his successor, President Gerald R. Ford, announced his decision to grant Nixon a full pardon for any crimes he may have committed while in office.

World Wildlife Fund (NGO)

Our work is focused around 6 ambitious goals with people at the center WWF's work has evolved from saving species and landscapes to addressing the larger global threats and forces that impact them. Recognizing that the problems facing our planet are increasingly more complex and urgent, we have refined the way in which we work around an ambitious new strategy. Our new strategy puts people at the center and organizes our work around six key areas: forests, marine, freshwater, wildlife, food and climate. By linking these six areas in an integrated approach, we can better leverage our unique assets and direct all our resources to protecting vulnerable places, species and communities worldwide. People are at the center of our work because together we can change the trajectory of the threats to nature, and help ensure nature's ability to provide—for the sake of every living thing, including ourselves. We work globally, with every sector, at every level To accomplish our ambitious goals, we work to educate and influence people into making sustainable choices and decisions, including those who work in business and make decisions around the use of natural resources, and those who work in government and set policy that impacts nature. We work globally at every level—in the field and in the local community, from the halls of government to the global marketplace. One of WWF's strengths is our ability to engage stakeholders—in business, civil society, and academia—in partnerships to devise innovative solutions to the issues that challenge us. Working together with 1.1 million supporters , WWF's partners, projects and experts are making a difference in creating a healthy future for our planet. We inform policymakers about the most effective and efficient ways to protect the species and places we care about most. WWF focuses on several issues critical to U.S. policymakers, including species conservation, ocean policy, natural resource management, climate change and international development assistance. Our policy advocacy has helped direct additional resources to critical species. The Save Vanishing Species stamp was created by the Multinational Species Conservation Funds Semipostal Stamp Act, which passed Congress with overwhelming bipartisan support. WWF proposed the original idea in 2000 and played a major role in securing approval of the stamp. The sale of the semipostal stamp provided Americans with a way to voluntarily support conservation overseas.

Civil Discourse in the Present Society

Political commentators increasingly note the disintegration of agreeable disagreement in our democracy. In our public debates, in panel discussions on radio or television, in town hall meetings and community forums, in legislative chambers, on internet blogs, and even on college campuses, where free and candid exchanges of views are thought to be the norm, negativity and personal attacks abound. Issues are cast as deadly battles between opposing ideologies. All of us probably have experienced the challenge of remaining civil when we are discussing policy matters about which we are passionate. Acknowledging that incivility does not advance the cause of democracy is one thing. Finding constructive examples of civil debate over contentious issues is another.

Citizens United v Federal Election Board

Political spending is a form of protected speech under the First Amendment, and the government may not keep corporations or unions from spending money to support or denounce individual candidates in elections. While corporations or unions may not give money directly to campaigns, they may seek to persuade the voting public through other means, including ads, especially where these ads were not broadcast.

Freedom of Information Act (1967)

Since 1967, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) has provided the public the right to request access to records from any federal agency. It is often described as the law that keeps citizens in the know about their government. Federal agencies are required to disclose any information requested under the FOIA unless it falls under one of nine exemptions which protect interests such as personal privacy, national security, and law enforcement.

Jamaican Violations of Rule of Law

Stewart is one of 93 civilians killed by Jamaican police this year. In a country of 2.8 million people which is awash with guns, and where powerful gangs have taken over inner-city areas so neglected by the state they have no running water or sanitation, the police have a reputation for being one of the deadliest security forces in the world. Over the past decade they have gunned down about 200 people a year, to the condemnation of human rights groups across the world. They include a woman who was seven months pregnant - shot in the head after she used what the police said was indecent language - and a 14-year-old boy killed a week before Stewart in the same neighbourhood.

Obama and Executive Orders

The American Presidency Project keeps tabs on executive orders and their historical counterparts dating back to the George Washington administration. The presidents who used orders and proclamations the most, per year, were Roosevelt, Herbert Hoover and Woodrow Wilson. Moreover, President Obama has issued the fewest executive orders per year, at 33.27 annually, since President Grover Cleveland's first term in the White House. President Roosevelt issued the most executive orders, according to records at the National Archives. He issued 3,728 orders between 1933 and 1945, as the country dealt with the Great Depression and World War II.

Constitution in Germany

The Basic Law determines that Germany is a constitutional state: All state authorities are subject to judicial control. Section 1 of the Basic Law is of particular relevance. It stipulates that respect for human dignity is the most important aspect of the constitution: "Human dignity shall be inviolable. To respect and protect it shall be the duty of all state authority." Among other things, the other basic rights guarantee the freedom to act within the law, equality before the law, freedom of the press and media, freedom of association and protection of the family. In determining that it is the people who exercise power through special bodies, the Basic Law lays down representative democracy as the form of rulership. Furthermore, it determines that Germany is a constitutional state: All state authorities are subject to judicial control. Another principle of the constitution is that Germany is a federal state, in other words the ruling authorities are divided up into a number of member states and the central state. In conclusion, the Basic Law defines Germany as a welfare state. The welfare state requires the political system to take precautions such that people are guaranteed a decent standard of material well-being in case of unemployment, disability, illness and in old age. One particular feature of the Basic Law is the so-called "eternal character" of these governing constitutional principles. Subsequent alterations to the Basic Law or a completely new constitution cannot encroach on the basic rights, the democratization of sovereignty, the federal state and the welfare state. In determining that it is the people who exercise power through special bodies, the Basic Law lays down representative democracy as the form of rulership. Furthermore, the constitutions of the German federal states stipulate instruments of direct democracy. With a popular initiative a minimum required number of citizens can call on a state parliament to draw up a law. In the same way a petition for referendum demands that the parliament pass a bill that has been presented. Should the parliament not heed the petition a referendum is held, through which the majority can determine the law.

Wong Wing v United States (1896)

The Chinese Exclusion Act imposed imprisonment at hard labor and deportation to Chinese persons convicted of unlawful entry to or presence in the United States. Wong Wing was charged under the act. A commissioner of the circuit court (who was not a judge) found that Wong Wing was an unlawful alien and sentenced him to 60 days at hard labor followed by deportation to China. Wong Wing sought a writ of habeas corpus, but it was denied. He appealed to the Supreme Court. consequently, the imprisonment provisions of the act are void. Congress may deport without a jury trial, but imprisonment at hard labor is an infamous offense calling for judicial trial to establish the guilt of the accused. "It is not consistent with our theory of government that the legislature should, after having defined an offense as an infamous crime, find the fact of guilt and adjudge the punishment by one of its own agents."

United States v Wong Kim Ark (1898)

The Chinese Exclusion Acts denied citizenship to Chinese immigrants. Moreover, by treaty no Chinese subject in the United States could become a naturalized citizen. Wong Kim Ark was born in San Francisco. At age 21, he returned to China to visit his parents who had previously resided in the United States for 20 years. When he returned to the United States, Wong was denied entry on the ground that he was not a citizen. The government could not deny naturalization to anyone born in the United States. To reach this conclusion, Justice Gray's tedious majority opinion managed to traverse much of western civilization.

Shelby County v Holder

The Fourteenth Amendment protects every person's right to due process of law. The Fifteenth Amendment protects citizens from having their right to vote abridged or denied due to "race, color, or previous condition of servitude." The Tenth Amendment reserves all rights not expressly granted to the federal government to the individual states. Article Four of the Constitution guarantees the right of self-government for each state. The Civil Rights Act of 1965 was enacted as a response to the nearly century-long history of voting discrimination. Section 5 prohibits eligible districts from enacting changes to their election laws and procedures without gaining official authorization. Section 4(b) defines the eligible districts as ones that had a voting test in place as of November 1, 1964 and less than 50% turnout for the 1964 presidential election. Such districts must prove to the Attorney General or a three-judge panel of a Washington, D.C. district court that the change "neither has the purpose nor will have the effect" of negatively impacting any individual's right to vote based on race or minority status. Section 5 was originally enacted for five years, but has been continually renewed since that time. Shelby County, Alabama, filed suit in district court and sought both a declaratory judgment that Section 5 and Section 4(b) are unconstitutional and a permanent injunction against their enforcement. The district court upheld the constitutionality of the Sections and granted summary judgment for the Attorney General. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held that Congress did not exceed its powers by reauthorizing Section 5 and that Section 4(b) is still relevant to the issue of voting discrimination.

Honest Leadership and Open Government Act

The Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 (Pub.L. 110-81, 121 Stat. 735, enacted September 14, 2007) is a law of the United States federal government that amended parts of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995. It strengthens public disclosure requirements concerning lobbying activity and funding, places more restrictions on gifts for members of Congress and their staff, and provides for mandatory disclosure of earmarks in expenditure bills. The bill was signed into law by President George W. Bush on September 15, 2007.[

Indian government

The Indian government is made up of states and is classified as a Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic with a parliamentary system of government. Parliament is made up of a president and a bicameral legislature. The bicameral legislature consists of the Lok Sabha ( the house of the people) and the Rajya Sabha (council of states). There can be 552 members of the Lok Sabha are chosen directly by the people and serve for 5 years and there can be 250 Rajya Sabha who are representatives of the 25 states and the 7 territories and they serve for 6 years. Parliament has the power to approve and remove members if the Council of Ministers, to create amendments to the constitution, determine state boundaries, create bills, and control government finances. The president and vice president of India are elected by an electoral college and serve for 5 years. It is the president's job to pass all bills before they become laws, to convene with both houses of parliament, he may send messages to either house, he elects judges and state governors, and it is his job to address parliament each year and go over any new laws. However most of the executive power is placed in the president's Council of Ministers (cabinet). The council of Ministers is led by their prime minister and they control the Lok Sabha. India also has an independent judiciary. Their supreme court consists of 25 justices elected by the president.

Influences on Udhr

The Latin American countries had brought to the process the ideas and experience gained in preparing the 1948 Pan-American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man; India had played a key role in advancing the non-discrimination principle, especially with respect to women; the United Kingdom and the United States had shared the wisdom acquired in their long experience with traditional political and civil liberties; the Soviet Union had championed the cause of improving the living conditions of the broad mass of people; the importance of including duties had been emphasized by participants from China, Latin America, the Soviet Union, and France; many smaller countries contributed to the articles on freedom of religion and the rights of the family; the social, economic, and cultural rights had numerous fathers and mothers. The Universal Declaration, with its thirty short articles, seems at first glance to invite comparison with older rights documents such as the Magna Carta, the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen, and the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution. In recent years, American influence upon the international human rights movement has become so pervasive that the Declaration is now widely read as Americans read the Bill of Rights: as string of essentially separate guarantees. As we shall see, however, that approach is inappropriate for an organic document like the Declaration.50 The Declaration is not a list or a "bill," but a set of principles that are related to one another and to certain over-arching ideas. It possesses an integrity which has considerable strength when the document is read as it was meant to be read, namely as a whole. Agreement on the relation of the "new" rights to the "old" was much harder to achieve than agreement on their content.65 According to Cassin, the sessions where the Commission wrestled with that problem were extremely difficult and emotionally charged. 6 6 England wanted the differences from traditional civil and political liberties to be sharply emphasized. It took the position that the social and economic rights should be handled in an entirely separate document.67 The Soviet Union, for its part, opposed any measure which would appear to relegate social and economic rights to an inferior rank.68 Madame Mehta, the Indian representative, pointed out that poorer nations could hope to move only gradually toward making such rights a reality.

Preamble of UDHR

The Preamble begins by asserting the dependence of freedom, justice, and peace upon the universal recognition of human dignity and rights. It announces the principal innovation of the Declaration: that human rights are universal, belonging to "all members of the human family." In other words, it repudiates the long standing view that the relation between a sovereign state and its own citizens is that nation's own business. The Preamble then evokes the circumstances that give rise to the need for universal standards: "[D]isregard and contempt for human 50 For a convincing argument that the clause-by-clause approach is also inappropriate for the Bill of Rights, see Akhil Reed Amar, The Bill of Rights as a Constitution, rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind." It goes on to speak of hopes for a better world where human beings may enjoy what most U.S. readers of the day would have recognized as Franklin Roosevelt's four freedoms: "freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want."52 It points toward a future when rights will be "protected by the rule of law" and by "the development of friendly relations among nations."

Civil War and Voting

The Reconstruction Act of 1867 required the former Confederate states to approve new constitutions, which were to be ratified by an electorate that included black as well as white men. In 1868, the Republican Party went further and called for a Fifteenth Amendment that would prohibit states from denying the vote based on race or previous condition of servitude. A proposal for a stronger amendment that would have prohibited states from denying or abridging the voting rights of adult males of sound mind (with the exception of felons and those who had engaged in rebellion against the United States) was defeated. A variety of methods—including violence in which hundreds of African Americans were murdered, property qualification laws, gerrymandering, and fraud—were used by Southern whites to reduce the level of black voting. The defeat in 1891 of the Federal Elections Bill, which would have strengthened the federal government's power to supervise elections, prevent suppression of the black vote, and overturn fraudulent elections, ended congressional efforts to enforce black voting rights in the South.

Salt March 1930

The Salt March, which took place from March to April 1930 in India, was an act of civil disobedience led by Mohandas Gandhi (1869-1948) to protest British rule in India. During the march, thousands of Indians followed Gandhi from his religious retreat near Ahmedabad to the Arabian Sea coast, a distance of some 240 miles. The march resulted in the arrest of nearly 60,000 people, including Gandhi himself. India finally was granted its independence in 1947. Britain's Salt Acts prohibited Indians from collecting or selling salt, a staple in the Indian diet. Citizens were forced to buy the vital mineral from the British, who, in addition to exercising a monopoly over the manufacture and sale of salt, also exerted a heavy salt tax. Although India's poor suffered most under the tax, Indians required salt. Defying the Salt Acts, Mohandas Gandhi reasoned, would be an ingeniously simple way for many Indians to break a British law nonviolently.

Why can lobbying be bad?

The most obviously unethical (and illegal) practice associated with lobbying is paying a policy maker to vote in a favorable way or rewarding him or her after a vote with valuable considerations. If this practice were allowed, people and organizations with money would always win the day. But even with outright gifts to lawmakers outlawed, there are subtler ways to "buy" undue influence. As we write, Congress is debating lobby reform that would disallow lobbyists paying for congressional travel and lavish meals. Local officials are faced with similar temptations-tickets to games or concerts, dinners in expensive restaurants, etc. Fairness questions also arise when some lobbyists have easier access to lawmakers than others. Frequently discussed is the problem of revolving door lobbyists-those people who once served as public officials who then go into the private sector and work to influence their former colleagues. In addition to relationships with lawmakers, they may, for example, still have access codes to offices, use lawmakers' exercise facilities, or otherwise have easier entrée to the corridors of power. Other kinds of relationships besides collegiality may undermine fairness. Especially on the local level, policy makers are often lobbied by people they know socially. It is incumbent upon public officials to avoid influence that might arise out of their friendships. Organized interests collectively report $3.2 billion a year in lobbying expenditures, and probably equally or greater amounts on non-reported lobbying-related activities. The most active organizations are now hiring upwards of 100 lobbyists to represent them. These statistics alone should tell us that special interests don't "buy" politicians with campaign contributions. If they did, there'd be no point in spending all that money to hire lobbyists.

Examples of Gerrymandering

The new case comes from Virginia, where Republicans drew the 3rd congressional district of Rep. Bobby Scott, the state's lone black representative, to include a 56% black population. Earlier this year, the court ruled 5-4 that Alabama Republicans had done much the same thing with state legislative districts and sent the maps back for further review. In Virginia's case, a federal district court tossed out the maps, which helped Republicans win eight of 11 House districts in a state that voted for President Obama over Mitt Romney, 51% to 47%, in 2012. The state did not appeal, but a group of current and former Republican members of Congress did; the Supreme Court said Friday it must determine if the lawmakers have standing to sue, since they do not live in the district in question.

Alien and Sedition Acts

The strong steps that Adams took in response to the French foreign threat also included severe repression of domestic protest. A series of laws known collectively as the ALIEN AND SEDITION ACTS were passed by the Federalist Congress in 1798 and signed into law by President Adams. These laws included new powers to DEPORT foreigners as well as making it harder for new IMMIGRANTS to vote. Previously a new immigrant would have to reside in the United States for five years before becoming eligible to vote, but a new law raised this to 14 years. The Sedition Act clearly violated individual protections under the first amendment of the Constitution; however, the practice of "JUDICIAL REVIEW," whereby the Supreme Court considers the constitutionality of laws was not yet well developed. Furthermore, the justices were all strong Federalists. As a result, Madison and Jefferson directed their opposition to the new laws to state legislatures. The Virginia and Kentucky legislatures passed resolutions declaring the federal laws invalid within their states. The bold challenge to the federal government offered by this strong states' rights position seemed to point toward imminent armed conflict within the United States. Enormous changes had occurred in the explosive decade of the 1790s. Federalists in government now viewed the persistence of their party as the equivalent of the survival of the republic. This led them to enact and enforce harsh laws. Madison, who had been the chief architect of a strong central government in the Constitution, now was wary of national authority. He actually helped the KENTUCKY LEGISLATURE to reject federal law. By placing states rights above those of the federal government, Kentucky and Virginia had established a precedent that would be used to justify the secession of southern states in the Civil War.

THE DORR WAR

The transition from property qualifications to universal white manhood suffrage occurred gradually, without violence and with surprisingly little dissension, except in Rhode Island, where lack of progress toward democratization provoked an episode known as the Dorr War. In 1841, Rhode Island, still operating under a Royal Charter granted in 1663, restricted suffrage to landowners and their eldest sons. The charter lacked a bill of rights and grossly underrepresented growing industrial cities, such as Providence, in the state legislature. As Rhode Island grew increasingly urban and industrial, the state's landless population increased and fewer residents were eligible to vote. By 1841, just 11,239 out of 26,000 adult males were qualified to vote. In 1841, Thomas W. Dorr, a Harvard-educated attorney, organized an extralegal convention to frame a new state constitution and abolish voting restrictions. The state's governor declared Dorr and his supporters guilty of insurrection, proclaimed a state of emergency, and called out the state militia. Dorr tried unsuccessfully to capture the state arsenal at Providence. He was arrested, found guilty of high treason, and sentenced to life imprisonment at hard labor. To appease popular resentment, the governor pardoned Dorr the next year, and the state adopted a new constitution in 1843. This constitution extended the vote to all taxpaying native-born adult males (including African Americans). But it imposed property requirements and lengthy residence requirements on immigrants. Rhode Island was unusual in having a large urban, industrial, and foreign-born working class. It appears that fear of allowing this group to attain political power explains the state's strong resistance to voting reform.

The Syrian Crisis

The violence in Syria began in March 2011 and the middle eastern country has been crippled by a brutal civil war ever since. Since then, the United Nations estimates more than 200,000 people have died in the clashes between President Bashar al-Assad's government and rebel forces who want him out. The UN's Refugee Agency says more than four million people have fled Syria to neighbouring countries, and over half of those are children. Many of the refugees are among the tens of thousands who have been arriving in Europe, trying to reach countries like Britain and Germany. .In July 2012, the International Red Cross said the violence in Syria had become so widespread that it was in a state of civil war. The trouble began in 2011 in the Syrian city of Deraa. Locals took to the streets to protest after 15 schoolchildren were arrested - and reportedly tortured - for writing anti-government graffiti on a wall. The protests were peaceful to begin with, calling for the release of the children, democracy and greater freedom for people in the country. The government responded angrily, and on 18 March 2011, the army opened fire on protesters, killing four people. The following day, they shot at mourners at the victims' funerals, killing another person. People were shocked and angry at what had happened and soon the unrest spread to other parts of the country. But once government forces opened fire on peaceful demonstrations, people demanded that the President, Bashar al-Assad, resign. The war is now more than just a battle between those for or against President Assad. In early 2014, in neighbouring Iraq, an extremist group called Islamic State, or IS, began to take over large areas of the country. IS is a radical militant group which has used violence against anyone who doesn't agree with their extremist views. They have also persecuted other groups, including Christians and Yazidis. IS later moved into eastern Syria and in the chaos of war they were able to gain land and power there too. To try and stop IS, in September 2014 the US, UK and other countries joined forces, using planes to attack their fighters on the ground in Iraq. On Wednesday December 2, 2015, MPs voted in favour of military action in Syria against IS. The first airstrikes were carried out RAF Tornado jets within hours of the vote in the House of Commons.

Examples of enlightened self interest

The women's rights activists supporting african americans were able to later get the vote. Enlightened self-interest can be the motivation for corporate philanthropy. Companies known for their charitable giving gain a reputation for responsibility in the eyes of consumers. Company donations of cash or resources are a form of paid advertising. They encourage consumers to form a positive opinion of the brand in much the same way as traditional marketing campaigns. Companies can use charitable donations to sway public opinion in their favor following adverse publicity or criminal prosecution. Scholarships and helping to promote the economy

Magna Carta Article 34

The writ of precipe (an order to prove innocence) shall not be allowed in the cases of property if it will takes away a freeman's right to trial

The Declaration of Independence Influence on different peoples

This ideal of equality has certainly influenced the course of American history. Early women's rights activists at SENECA FALLS in 1848 modeled their "DECLARATION OF SENTIMENTS" in precisely the same terms as the Declaration of Independence. "We hold these truths to be self-evident," they said, "that all men and women are created equal." Similarly, the African-American anti-slavery activist DAVID WALKER challenged white Americans in 1829 to "See your Declaration Americans!!! Do you understand your own language?" Walker dared America to live up to its self-proclaimed ideals. If all men were created equal, then why was slavery legal?

Thoreau's Civil Disobedience

Thoreau begins his essay by arguing that government rarely proves itself useful and that it derives its power from the majority because they are the strongest group, not because they hold the most legitimate viewpoint. He contends that people's first obligation is to do what they believe is right and not to follow the law dictated by the majority. When a government is unjust, people should refuse to follow the law and distance themselves from the government in general. A person is not obligated to devote his life to eliminating evils from the world, but he is obligated not to participate in such evils. This includes not being a member of an unjust institution (like the government). Thoreau further argues that the United States fits his criteria for an unjust government, given its support of slavery and its practice of aggressive war. Thoreau doubts the effectiveness of reform within the government, and he argues that voting and petitioning for change achieves little. He presents his own experiences as a model for how to relate to an unjust government: In protest of slavery, Thoreau refused to pay taxes and spent a night in jail.

State Constitutions and constitutional change

Virginia- The Virginia Constitution can be amended via two different paths: 1. Through a legislatively referred constitutional amendment as established in Section 1 of Article XII. These can be proposed in either house of the Virginia State Legislature. If a proposed amendment is approved by a simple majority vote in one session of the state legislature, it is automatically referred to the next session of the state legislature that occurs after the next general election of members of the Virginia House of Delegates. If in that second session the proposed amendment is "agreed to by a majority of all the members elected to each house" it is then placed before the state's voters. It can go on a special or general election ballot. If approved by a simple majority vote, it becomes part of the state's constitution. 2. Through a constitutional convention as established in Section 2 of Article XII. A convention can happen if the state's legislature "by a vote of two-thirds of the members elected to each house" calls a convention. Pennsylvania- The Pennsylvania Constitution is only explicit about one way to change it; namely, the process of a legislatively referred constitutional amendment. The constitution does not lay out the rules for how a constitutional convention can be called but, nevertheless, the state has held five such conventions, mostly recently in 1968 when the current constitution was adopted.[2] The rules governing legislatively referred constitutional amendments are in Article XI, which has only one section. Features of Article XI are: Either chamber of the Pennsylvania General Assembly can propose amendments. If a simple majority of both chambers approves of a proposed amendment, that amendment must be "published three months before the next general election, in at least two newspapers in every county in which such newspapers shall be published." In the next session of the legislature, the amendment must be considered again. If it is approved a second time by a simple majority of both houses, the amendment goes on a statewide ballot. This can be at any election date as determined by the state legislature. "...no amendment or amendments shall be submitted oftener than once in five years." Separate amendments must be voted on separately.

Alexis de Tocqueville and why american democracy works

While Democracy in America may at times seem to be a rather disorganized collection of observations and thoughts on American democracy, it is possible to gain a coherent sense of the work as a whole by looking at all of Tocqueville's various and sundry remarks through the lens of one paramount theme: the preservation of liberty in the midst of a growing equality of conditions. Volume One, the more optimistic half of the book, focuses mostly on the structure of government and the institutions that help to maintain freedom in American society. Volume Two focuses much more on individuals and the effects of the democratic mentality on the thoughts and mores prevalent in society. Taking the work as a whole, one finds that main problems of a democracy are the following: a disproportionately high portion of power in the legislative branch, an abuse of or lack of love for freedom, an excessive drive for equality, individualism, and materialism. The elements that Tocqueville believes can most successfully combat these dangerous democratic tendencies are: an independent and influential judiciary, a strong executive branch, local self-government, administrative de-centralization, religion, well-educated women, freedom of association, and freedom of the press.

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) (2014)

for youth who came to the United States as children. Under a directive from the secretary of DHS, these parents and youth may be granted a type of temporary permission to stay in the U.S. called "deferred action." These programs are expected to help up to 4.4 million people, according to the Department of Homeland Security. However, A federal district court in Texas has issued an order that temporarily blocks the DAPA and expanded DACA programs from being implemented. This means that people will not be able to apply for DAPA or expanded DACA until a court issues an order that allows the initiatives to go forward.

Florida and Voter Identification Laws

http://www.tampabay.com/news/advocates-for-homeless-want-to-make-it-easier-to-get-a-state-id/1277155

A history of voting rights

https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/government-and-civics/essays/winning-vote-history-voting-rights

Magna Carta Article 53

the barons have jurisdictions over forests even when it was a kings unlawful decree

Democracy

A government by the people

Republic

A state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.

Magna Carta Article 33

All fish-weirs shall be removed except for on the coast

UDHR article 1

All humans are born free and equal with conscious so they may work toward brotherhood

Amnesty International

Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all. With more than 2.2 million members and subscribers in more than 150 countries, they conduct research and generate action to prevent and end grave abuses of human rights and to demand justice for those whose rights have been violated.

Compulsory Voting

Australia(94%) & Belgium (89%)

National Voting Holidays

Australia(94%) & Belgium (89%) (compulsory voting), France (55%), Germany (72%), India (66%), and New Zealand (76%)

Magna Carta Article 32

Barons will not keep the lands of a felon for longer than a year and a day and after they shall be returned to the lords

Model Roman Pillar

Four Pillars: The general principles of dignity, liberty, equality, and fraternity, proclaimed in Articles 1 and 2, are the portico's foundation blocks. The facade consists of four equal columns crowned by a pediment. The four pillars are: the personal liberties (Articles 3 through 11); the rights of the individual in relation to others and to various groups (Articles 12 through 17); the spiritual, public, and political liberties (Articles 18 through 21); and the economic, social, and cultural rights (Articles 22 through 27). The pediment is composed of the three concluding articles, 28 through 30, which establish a range of connections between the the individual and society.

New Voting Restrictions

Georgia- (2011) reduced early voting period from 25-21 days and cut early voting weekend before election day Virginia- Photo ID requirements (2014) limits on third party voter registration North Carolina- Eliminated same day registration and reduced early voting periods, ended pre reg for 16-17 year old (2014), and implemented photo ID(2016) West Virginia- (2011) 16-17 early voting period changed to 10 Iowa- felon restriction

Magna Carta Article 52

If there is not a lawful judgement property and rights shall be returned to the defendant. If it is unlawfully done by the king the barons will decide what to do.

THE MISSISSIPPI PLAN

In 1890, Mississippi pioneered new methods to prevent African Americans from voting. Through lengthy residence requirements, poll taxes, literacy tests, property requirements, cumbersome registration procedures, and laws disenfranchising voters for minor criminal offenses, Southern states drastically reduced black voting. In Mississippi, just 9,000 of 147,000 African Americans of voting age were qualified to vote. In Louisiana, the number of black registered voters fell from 130,000 to 1,342. Meanwhile, grandfather clauses in these states exempted whites from all residence, poll tax, literacy, and property requirements if their ancestors had voted prior to enactment of the Fifteenth Amendment.

New Motor Voter Act

In a move lawmakers hope will drive more Californians to the polls, Gov. Jerry Brown approved legislation that automatically registers citizens to vote when they obtain or renew driver's licenses or state identification cards.

Machiavelli

Niccolo di Bernardo dei Machiavelli was an Italian political philosopher and diplomat. A central figure in the political Renaissance, he wrote The Prince and discourses on Livy. He is most famous for The Prince, which describes how political leaders can get, keep, and expand political power. Machiavelli believed that political ends justify whatever means—including cruelty—are required to achieve them. He famously observed that it is safer for a prince to be feared than loved.

NGOs

Non-governmental organizations play an increasingly important role in international development. They serve as a funnel for development funds both from individual donors in wealthy countries and from bilateral aid agencies. At the same time, NGOs are frequently idealized as organizations committed to "doing good" while setting aside profit or politics—a romantic view that is too starry-eyed. Development-oriented NGOs, which have existed for centuries, have played a growing role in development since the end of World War II; there are currently 20,000 international NGOs. This paper argues that the strengths of NGOs and their weaknesses easily fit into economists' conceptualization of not-for-profit contractors. Key concepts include: Strengths of the NGO model produce corresponding weaknesses in agenda-setting, decision-making, and resource allocation. The increased presence of NGOs can be explained by 3 factors: a trend to outsource government services; new ventures by would-be not-for-profit "entrepreneurs"; and the increasing professionalization of existing NGOs. As NGOs increasingly produce their own funding and develop their own professionalized class, it is appropriate to expose them to greater market forces beyond donor preferences. The use of aid vouchers allowing beneficiaries to purchase private goods and services is one tool for introducing more market forces. Examples of NGOS "Doctors without boarders" They are able to work with out the disadvantages of being connected to the united states (finically and socially). The us government establishes no travel zones for them but these people still go. A mobile clinic run by Doctors Without Borders in Yemen was bombed Wednesday in Saudi-led airstrikes, wounding at least seven people, IBTimes UK reported. In October, a U.S. airstrike mistakenly killed 30 people at a Doctors Without Borders hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan. U.S. military officials announced last month that the attack was the result of military personnel inadvertently aiming at the wrong target — the hospital compound — instead of a suspected nearby site, from which Taliban fighters were firing.

Magna Carta Article 1

The English church shall be free and maintain all its rights. The church will have free elections

Why was the 26th amendment passed

The long debate over lowering the voting age in America from 21 to 18 began during World War II and intensified during the Vietnam War, when young men denied the right to vote were being conscripted to fight for their country. In the 1970 case Oregon v. Mitchell, a divided U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Congress had the right to regulate the minimum age in federal elections, but not at the state and local level. Amid increasing support for a Constitutional amendment, Congress passed the 26th Amendment in March 1971; the states promptly ratified it, and President Richard M. Nixon signed it into law that July.

Vacancies in the federal court

There are 66 vacancies in the federal court. These judges reported that vacancies slowed the court's ability to resolve motions and try cases, which drove up litigation costs, caused evidence to go stale, made it harder to settle civil cases, and in some instances, pressured clients to plead guilty. They also said vacancies created heavier caseloads, which meant judges had less time to spend on cases, and resulted in fewer administrative staff, which left courts unable to effectively manage dockets. Although some districts are able to compensate for empty seats, their stopgap solutions do not fix the problem and only underscore the need to fill those seats.

Magna Carta Article 8

Widows shall not be forced to be married, but if the women holds land and wants to remarry she must have permission from a king or Barron.

NGO's and ROL

http://unrol.org/article.aspx?article_id=23

Riley v California

avid Leon Riley belonged to the Lincoln Park gang of San Diego, California. On August 2, 2009, he and others opened fire on a rival gang member driving past them. The shooters then got into Riley's Oldsmobile and drove away. On August 22, 2009, the police pulled Riley over driving a different car; he was driving on expired license registration tags. Because Riley's driver's license was suspended, police policy required that the car be impounded. Before a car is impounded, police are required to perform an inventory search to confirm that the vehicle has all its components at the time of seizure, to protect against liability claims in the future, and to discover hidden contraband. During the search, police located two guns and subsequently arrested Riley for possession of the firearms. Riley had his cell phone in his pocket when he was arrested, so a gang unit detective analyzed videos and photographs of Riley making gang signs and other gang indicia that were stored on the phone to determine whether Riley was gang affiliated. Riley was subsequently tied to the shooting on August 2 via ballistics tests, and separate charges were brought to include shooting at an occupied vehicle, attempted murder, and assault with a semi-automatic firearm. Before trial, Riley moved to suppress the evidence regarding his gang affiliation that had been acquired through his cell phone. His motion was denied. At trial, a gang expert testified to Riley's membership in the Lincoln Park gang, the rivalry between the gangs involved, and why the shooting could have been gang-related. The jury convicted Riley on all three counts and sentenced to fifteen years to life in prison. The California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 1, affirmed. Question Was the evidence admitted at trial from Riley's cell phone discovered through a search that violated his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches? Conclusion Yes. Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. wrote the opinion for the unanimous Court. The Court held that the warrantless search exception following an arrest exists for the purposes of protecting officer safety and preserving evidence, neither of which is at issue in the search of digital data. The digital data cannot be used as a weapon to harm an arresting officer, and police officers have the ability to preserve evidence while awaiting a warrant by disconnecting the phone from the network and placing the phone in a "Faraday bag." The Court characterized cell phones as minicomputers filled with massive amounts of private information, which distinguished them from the traditional items that can be seized from an arrestee's person, such as a wallet. The Court also held that information accessible via the phone but stored using "cloud computing" is not even "on the arrestee's person." Nonetheless, the Court held that some warrantless searches of cell phones might be permitted in an emergency: when the government's interests are so compelling that a search would be reasonable. Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. wrote an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment in which he expressed doubt that the warrantless search exception following an arrest exists for the sole or primary purposes of protecting officer safety and preserving evidence. In light of the privacy interests at stake, however, he agreed that the majority's conclusion was the best solution. Justice Alito also suggested that the legislature enact laws that draw reasonable distinctions regarding when and what information within a phone can be reasonably searched following an arrest.