Constitutionality is the condition of acting in accordance with an applicable constitution . ref http www.merriam webster.com dictionary constitutionality Webster On Line ref Acts that are not in accordance with the rules laid down in the constitution are deemed to be ultra vires . References Reflist See also ultra vires Company law Constitutional law Judicial review Constitutionalism Category Constitutions Category Political charters Law stub de Verfassungswidrigkeit ja ... more details
A presumption of constitutionality shifts the Legal burden of proof burden of proof from the government to the citizen, requiring them to prove that a statute is unconstitutional . In Federalist 78 , Alexander Hamilton wrote that courts should only be able strike down a statute as unconstitutional if there is an irreconcilable variance between the statute and the Constitution. ref Hamilton, Alexander. http www.constitution.org fed federa78.htm Federalist 78 1788 06 14 . ref Otherwise, a statute should be upheld. Likewise, at the 1787 Philadelphia Convention , Virginia delegate George Mason said that judges could declare an unconstitutional law void. But with regard to every law, however unjust, oppressive or pernicious, which did not come plainly under this description, they would be under the necessity as Judges to give it a free course. ref http press pubs.uchicago.edu founders documents a1 7 2 3s4.html Founders Constitution, Article 1, Section 7, Clauses 2 and 3 , Records of the Federal Convention 1787 06 04 . ref Professor Randy Barnett argues that such a presumption is itself unconstitutional, and suggests that government should be forced to prove that laws violating liberty are necessary and proper, in what he calls the presumption of liberty . ref Barnett, Randy. Restoring the Lost Constitution Restoring the Lost Constitution The Presumption of Liberty Princeton University Press 2004 . ref See also Judicial review Judicial review in the United States List of legal doctrines References references Category Legal doctrines and principles Category Constitutional law ... more details
Unreferenced date July 2010 In Canada, the term quasi constitutional is used for laws which contain a provision causing them to override any subsequent laws which might contradict them. At the federal level, such laws include the Canadian Bill of Rights and the Official Languages Act . In Quebec, the Charter of the French Language and the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms have been given quasi constitutional status. A quasi constitutional law may be overridden by means of a provision, in any subsequent law, stating that this new law applies notwithstanding the previous quasi constitutional law. However, in the absence of such a disclaimer in the new law, the quasi constitutional law is considered to override any contradicting provision of the later enacted law. This is in contrast to the normal rule, under which any new law is considered to automatically override any contradictory provision of any law that had been passed by the same parliament or legislature at an earlier date. For example, section 2 of the Canadian Bill of Rights states cquote Every law of Canada shall, unless it is expressly declared by an Act of the Parliament of Canada that it shall operate notwithstanding the Canadian Bill of Rights, be so construed and applied as not to abrogate, abridge or infringe or to authorize the abrogation, abridgment or infringement of any of the rights or freedoms herein recognized and declared.... Similarly, subsection 82 1 of the Official Languages Act states that in the event of any inconsistency between Parts I V of that Act, and any part of any later Act of Parliament, the provisions of the Official Languages Act will prevail. A quasi constitutional law may be repealed or amended by means of an ordinary Act of the parliament or legislature, just like any other law. In this respect, therefore, such laws are not genuinely constitutional laws, which normally require some higher form of approval, such as the approval of multiple provincial legislatures, in ... more details
Grutter may refer to Alfred Gr tter Swiss sports shooter Grutter v Bollinger Barbara Grutter 2003 United States Supreme Court case upholding the constitutionality of the University of Michigan Law School s affirmative action program. Disambig ... more details
Implied powers , in the United States , are those powers authorized by a legal document from the Constitution which, while not stated, seem to be implied by powers expressly stated. When George Washington asked Alexander Hamilton to defend the constitutionality of the First Bank of the United States against the protests ref http courses.pasleybrothers.com texts Jefferson on BUS.htm Against the Constitutionality of the Bank of the United States , Thomas Jefferson. ref of Thomas Jefferson , James Madison , and Attorney General Edmund Randolph , Hamilton produced what has now become the classic statement for implied powers. ref http avalon.law.yale.edu 18th century bank ah.asp For the Constitutionality of the Bank of the United States , Alexander Hamilton. ref Hamilton argued that the sovereign duties of a government implied the right to use means adequate to its ends. Although the United States government was sovereign only as to certain objects, it was impossible to define all the means which it should use, because it was impossible for the founders to anticipate all future exigencies. Hamilton noted that the Taxing and Spending Clause general welfare clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause necessary and proper clause gave elasticity to the constitution. Hamilton won the argument with Washington, who signed his Bank Bill into law. Later, directly borrowing from Hamilton, Chief Justice John Marshall invoked the implied powers of government in the court decision of McCulloch v. Maryland . This was used to justify the denial of the right of a state to tax a bank, the Second Bank of the United States , using the idea to argue the constitutionality of the United States Congress creating it in 1816. In the case of the United States government, implied powers are the powers exercised by Congress which are not explicitly given by the constitution itself but necessary and proper to execute the powers which are. Notes reflist Category Constitutional law Category Legal doctr ... more details
The Constitutional Council of Chad judges the constitutionality of legislation and treaties in Chad . It consists of nine judges who are elected to 9 year terms. It is established by Title VII of the Constitution of Chad . Sources http www.state.gov r pa ei bgn 37992.htm Background Notes on Chad from the United States Department of State DEFAULTSORT Constitutional Council Of Chad Category Chadian law Category National supreme courts Chad Chad stub law stub bg ... more details
a personal or property right. The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of a statute at the instance ... is drawn in question, and even if a serious doubt of constitutionality is raised, it is a cardinal ... more details
italic title Crotty v. An Taoiseach was a legal action taken in 1987 in Ireland 1987 in the High Court of Ireland and in the Supreme Court of Ireland Supreme Court on appeal by Raymond Crotty , historian and economist against the Government of Ireland Irish Government . The case directly led to the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution of Ireland and established that significant changes to Treaties of the European Union European Union treaties required an amendment to the Constitution of Ireland Irish constitution always done by means of a referendum before they could be ratified by the state. While the action taken by Crotty was made on a number of grounds, the only grounds on which the appeal was allowed by the Supreme Court were those relating to cooperation in the field of foreign policy. In particular, it was the opinion of the Court that all other aspects of the treaty were consistent with the Constitution, including the expansion of Qualified Majority Voting to new policy areas, and the creation of the European Court of First Instance . The judgments were divided into two sections. The first consisted of a single judgment of the court which upheld the constitutionality of the European Communities Amendment Act, 1986 . The constitution requires the court to give only a single judgment on the constitutionality of acts of parliament. The second part consisted of separate judgments on the constitutionality of ratifying the foreign policy provisions of the Single European Act . In this section Justices Brian Walsh judge Walsh , Henchy and Hederman formed the majority of the court and ruled that the SEA could not be ratified by the state without a reference to the people. They argued that the state s power to determine its foreign relations was held in trust from the people and could not be alienated by the government. Chief Justice Thomas Finlay judge Finlay and Justice Griffin dissented. External links Cite BAILII country ie litigants Raymond Crotty v An Taoiseach ... more details
concerning the constitutionality of a law is from 1999 where several named individual schools from ... on the constitutionality of Danish membership of the European Union . It is unclear what the political ... thus had legal interest in the constitutionality of Danish accession to the EU. Denmark has no constitutional court and thus the question on the constitutionality of a law is to be contested before the existing courts. All courts are able to rule on the constitutionality of a law but in practice such highly ... more details
Unreferenced date November 2008 A student fee is a fee charged to student s at a school , above and beyond the normal tuition and matriculation fees. These may be charged for general student activities , for supporting student media and other student organization s, for intercollegiate or intramural sports or academics , or as a means of making up for a shortfall in state funding at a public college often called a technology fee . Other fees may be charged to students, such as for insurance and health such as a school nurse , and optional fees such as for parking . Constitutionality of activity fees in the United States In the United States, the constitutionality of mandatory student activity fees has been adjudicated several times by the Supreme Court of the United States . Most recently, the court has ruled that public universities may subsidize campus speech by means of a mandatory student activity fee so long as fees are allocated to groups with viewpoint neutrality. See Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System v. Southworth ussc 529 217 2000 . Other student fee cases Rosenberger v. University of Virginia , 515 U. S. 819 1995 Category Student organizations Category Political activism Category Civil rights and liberties ... more details
italic title Wilson v. Ake , 354 F.Supp.2d 1298, was a federal lawsuit brought about in the state of Florida , by two Florida women who had been same sex marriage married in the state of Massachusetts the previous summer. The women sought to have the Defense of Marriage Act DOMA , which allows states to refuse to recognize same sex marriages from other states, ruled Constitutionality unconstitutional . On January 19, 2005, U.S. District Court Judge James S. Moody Jr. dismissed the suit, upholding the DOMA. External links http www.alliancealert.org 2005 20050119.pdf LGBT law stub Category Same sex union case law Category Same sex marriage in the United States Category United States LGBT rights case law Category 2005 in United States case law ... more details
Unreferenced stub auto yes date December 2009 Orphan date December 2009 In Portugal Portuguese law , the assentos literally, settlements were general obligatory wiktionary rule rule s expressed in some of the decisions of the Supreme Court of Justice. Unlike precedent s, the assentos had the form of a general rule. Unlike statutory law statutory legislation , the assentos were made by a court and after a concrete Legal case case was presented before the court. The assentos were declared Constitutionality unconstitutional by the Portuguese Constitutional Court Constitutional Court and no longer exist in Portuguese law. Euro law stub Portugal stub Category Portuguese law ... more details
orphan date January 2010 McKay v. The Queen , 1965 S.C.R. 798 is an early election law decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the constitutionality of laws that limited the erection of election signs. The Court held that a municipal zoning regulation against signs on residential properties could not include federal election signs. The reading down of the municipal by law to not include Federal election signs evidences an early stage in the evolution of the Interjurisdictional immunity legal doctrine. See also List of Supreme Court of Canada cases Richards Court through Fauteux Court External links lexum scc2 1965 0 798 3 Category Canadian federalism case law Category Supreme Court of Canada cases Category 1965 in Canada Category Supreme Court of Canada case articles without infoboxes Category 1965 in case law canada law stub ... more details
The Interception of Communications Bill of 2006 is a Zimbabwe an bill that proposes to allow government agencies to intercept telephonic, e mail and cellphone messages. The Bill also requires that operators of telecommunications services install software and hardware to enable interception of communication and storing of information specified by the government. See also South Africa s Regulation of Interception of Communications and Provision of Communication Related Information Act RICA External links http www.cpu.org.uk pfnews.html Zimbabwe moves to monitor private communications article by Commonwealth Press Union http www.zimbabwesituation.com apr27 2006.html MISA Zimbabwe analysis the constitutionality of the Interception of Communications Bill 2006 on Zimbabwe Situation statute stub Zimbabwe gov stub Category Privacy of telecommunications Category Communications in Zimbabwe ... more details
BLP sources date July 2009 Effat Nejati also known as Shahla Moharrami was a member of the Iranian Mujahideen e Khalq who ran Canadian operations after illegally immigrating to the country in January 1995. ref name frogs Montreal Gazette , Muslim Council to contest constitutionality of process , July 16, 2003 ref She was arrested in August 1996 on charges of raising funds, recruiting members and making travel arrangements to support the overthrow of the Iranian government, and deported to the United Kingdom in November 1996. ref name frogs References Reflist CanadianTerrorism state collapsed Persondata Metadata see Wikipedia Persondata . NAME Nejati, Effat ALTERNATIVE NAMES SHORT DESCRIPTION DATE OF BIRTH PLACE OF BIRTH DATE OF DEATH PLACE OF DEATH DEFAULTSORT Nejati, Effat Category Canadian Muslims Category Living people ... more details
National Mutual Insurance Co. v. Tidewater Transfer Co. , case citation 337 U.S. 582 1949 , was a legal case case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that upheld the constitutionality of 28 U.S.C. 1332 d . 1332 d treats citizens of United States territories as citizens of a state for the purpose of establishing diversity jurisdiction . ref Yeazell, S.C. Civil Procedure, Seventh Edition. Aspen Publishers, New York, NY 2008, p. 197 ref See also List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 337 References reflist Category Civil procedure Category Jurisdiction Category 1949 in United States case law ... more details
Leland v. Oregon , 343 U.S. 790 1952 , was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that upheld the constitutionality of placing the legal burden of proof burden of persuasion on the defendant when they argue an insanity defense in a criminal trial . ref Bonnie, R.J. et. al. Criminal Law, Second Edition. Foundation Press, New York, NY 2004, p. 541 ref See also List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 343 References reflist External links http supreme.justia.com us 343 790 case.html Full text of the opinion at Justia.com Criminal due process doubt state expanded Category United States criminal burden of proof case law Category United States Supreme Court cases Category 1952 in United States case law ... more details
orphan date September 2010 Refimprove date September 2010 The Special Division is a division of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit . 28 U.S.C. 49 1982 ed., Supp. V Title VI of the Ethics in Government Act . It consists of three circuit court judges or justices appointed by the Chief Justice of the United States . One of the judges must be a judge of the DC Circuit, and no two of the judges may be named to the Special Division from a particular court. The judges are appointed for 2 year terms, with any vacancy being filled only for the remainder of the 2 year period. Its constitutionality was upheld in Morrison v. Olson . References http www.law.cornell.edu supct html historics USSC CR 0487 0654 ZO.html 487 US 654n3 Morrison v. Olson Category United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ... more details
A privilege tax is a tax levied in exchange for a privilege or license granted to the taxpayer. The fee for registering a motor vehicle is one example of a privilege tax. Many taxes on businesses are characterized as privilege taxes. For example, Arizona s transaction privilege tax is a gross receipts tax on business. In the 1911 case of Flint v. Stone Tracy Co. , the United States Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a corporate income tax , determining that it was an indirect tax on the privilege of doing business as a corporation . ref http www.answers.com topic income tax ixzz1L4Vi71xf Oxford Companion to the US Supreme Court Income Tax , accessed on answers.com, April 30, 2011 ref References reflist Category Taxation Category Legal terms ... more details
. 2 The Constitutional Court shall a review the constitutionality of laws adopted, but not yet published, b review at the request of a judge the constitutionality of legislation to be applied in an individual case, c on the basis of a constitutional complaint, review the constitutionality of legislation ... or one quarter of the Members of Parliament review the constitutionality of laws, e review the conflict ... under section c d of paragraph 2 , the Constitutional Court shall review the constitutionality ... more details
entrusted to censoring the laws constitutionality. The aforementioned court was existent till its .... The SCC is alone responsible for censoring the constitutionality of the laws and regulations ... the competences of this court as follows To censor the constitutionality of the laws and regulations ... more details
Unref date March 2008 A collusive lawsuit sometimes referred to as a collusive action is a lawsuit in which the parties to the suit have no actual quarrel with one another, but one sues the other to achieve some result desired by both. Examples Constitutional law For example, if two people think a law is Constitutionality unconstitutional , one might sue another in order to put the lawsuit before a court which can rule on its constitutionality. Because courts generally reserve jurisdiction for situations in which there is an actual Case or Controversy Clause case or controversy i.e., a real dispute between the parties where such a suit is suspected, the court may refuse to exercise jurisdiction . Tort fraud Another form of collusive lawsuit involves fraud , where two persons agree to fake an accident , so that the victim can sue the other person in order to collect from the other person s insurance . This is a crime , and insurance companies investigate claims to determine that no collusion is involved. Because of the fear of collusive suits, many jurisdictions have, at various times, prohibited spouses from suing one another or prohibited children from suing their parents. Also, many jurisdictions have had guest statute s which make it difficult for a passenger in a non commercial vehicle to sue the driver if the passenger is injured due to the driver s negligence . At fault divorce Another example is in divorce , in those jurisdiction s where fault legal fault remains as a condition before commencement of an action for breach of the marriage contract. See also Connivance Tort reform Tortfeasor DEFAULTSORT Collusive Lawsuit Category Activism by method Category Civil procedure Category Lawsuits law term stub ... more details
about the lobbying regulation case the Ku Klux Case United States v. Harris SCOTUSCase Litigants United States v. Harriss ArgueDate October 19 ArgueYear 1953 DecideDate June 7 DecideYear 1954 FullName United States v. Harriss, et al. USVol 347 USPage 612 Citation 74 S. Ct. 808 98 L. Ed. 989 1954 U.S. LEXIS 2657 Prior Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia Subsequent Holding The Court upheld the act s constitutionality, but also by narrowed the scope and application of the act. SCOTUS 1953 1954 Majority Warren JoinMajority Reed, Frankfurter, Burton, Minton Dissent Douglas JoinDissent Black Dissent2 Jackson NotParticipating Clark LawsApplied Regulation of Lobbying Act wikisource United States v. Harriss , Case citation 347 U.S. 612 1954 , was a Supreme Court of the United States U.S. Supreme Court case applied directly to the Regulation of Lobbying Act . Proceedings and outcome Lobbyists challenged the Regulation of Lobbying Act for being unconstitutionally vague and unclear. In Harriss , the Supreme Court responded by upholding the act s constitutionality, but also by narrowing the scope and application of the act. The Court ruled that the act applies only to paid lobbyists who directly communicate with members of United States Congress Congress on pending or proposed federal legislation. This means that lobbyists who visit with congressional staff members rather than members of Congress themselves are not considered lobbyists. In addition, the act covers only attempts to influence the passage or defeat of legislation in Congress, and excludes other congressional activities. Further, the act applies to and restricts only individuals who spend at least half of their time lobbying. ref http www.answers.com topic lobbying Lobbying from Answers.com ref See also List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 347 Notes reflist 2 External links http caselaw.lp.findlaw.com scripts getcase.pl?navby CASE&court US&vol 347&page 612 Full text ... more details
Infobox High Court court name nowrap Supreme Constitutional Court of Syria br image imagesize established 1973 country Syria location Damascus coordinates type President of Syria Presidential appointment authority Constitution of Syria Syrian Constitution terms renewable terms of four years positions 5 website chiefjudgetitle President of the Supreme Court chiefjudgename Adnan Zureiq termstart June 2008 Politics of Syria The Supreme Constitutional Court lang ar , Al Mahkamah al Dust r yah al Uly is the highest jurisdictional authority in the Syrian Arab Republic . The Supreme Court was established under the 1973 Constitution to adjudicate electoral disputes, rule on the constitutionality of a law or decree challenged by the president or People s Council, and to render opinions on the constitutionality of bills, decrees, and regulations when requested to do so by the president. The High Constitutional Court is forbidden, however, to question the validity of the popularly approved laws submitted by the President of the Republic to popular referendums. The court consists of the president and four judges he appoints to serve a renewable term of four years. ref name Lib http rs6.loc.gov frd cs sytoc.html Country Studies Syria , Library of Congress ref Composition The Supreme Court consists of its president called the President of the Supreme Court and 4 ordinary member judges. ref name number http e.sy govmember.php?pid MzAwOQ &mid 2 Bot generated title ref Judges of the Supreme Court are appointed by the President of Syria President . Current membership June 2008 The President of the Supreme Court Mr. Justice Adnan Zureiq Mr. Justice Ahmad al Abdallah Mr. Justice Badr al Muallem Mr. Justice Mostafa Hazzouri Mr. Justice Bashir Debbas References reflist Syria topics Asia topic Supreme Court of title Supreme Courts of Asia countries only yes Category Government of Syria Category N ... more details
other persons Timothy Walton is a California n lawyer attorney known for suing spammers. As a result of his work on the Ferguson case, a California Court of Appeal upheld the constitutionality of California s Spamming spam law. In 2003, some spammers retaliated against Walton by sending spam that appeared to come from his servers. Various network administrators have demonstrated that the incident was a joe job attack rather than spam sent by Walton. External links http www.whew.com Rulings California Court of Appeal.shtml Ferguson Appellate Ruling http www.timothywalton.com TimothyWalton.com http www.spamcon.org SpamCon Persondata Metadata see Wikipedia Persondata . NAME Walton, Timothy ALTERNATIVE NAMES SHORT DESCRIPTION DATE OF BIRTH PLACE OF BIRTH DATE OF DEATH PLACE OF DEATH DEFAULTSORT Walton, Timothy Category Year of birth missing living people Category Living people Category Anti spam Category California lawyers Walton, Timothy, Timothy US law bio stub ... more details
Encyclopedia
top
