Texas Constitutional Setting

Texas Constitutional Setting
The Constitutional Setting:
Amending the Texas Constituion rules are set by Article 17 of the Texas Constitution. You begin
with the proposal for amendment of the Texas Constitution. It takes a two thirds vote of the full
committee of both houses of the legislature. To constitute a two–thirds majority vote, one hundred
members of the house and twenty–one senators must vote for the proposal to amend the constitution.
Individual legislators' votes must be publicly recorded. The legislature gets to choose the date for the
ratification election. The Secretary of State will then draft a brief statement of each proposed
amendment. Which then has to be approved by the Attorney General. A statement of these changes
must be widely published before
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

The Constitutional Basis Of Federalism
Constitutional Basis of Federalism Loyalty to state governments during the Constitutional Era was
so strong that the Constitution would have been defeated Central government was facing difficulties
People were too dispersed and communication and transportation was not strong enough to allow
governing from one location The Division of Power The Framers defined the powers of state and
national governments Although they favored stronger national government, they still made the states
have an important role Constitution guaranteed states equal representation in the Senate Made states
responsible for both state and national elections Guaranteed that Congress couldn 't forbid the
creation of new states by dividing old ones unless by the consent of the state governments Created
obligations of national government to protect states against violence and invasion Supremacy
clause: the clause in Article VI of the Constitution that makes the Constitution, national laws, and
readies supreme over state laws as long as the national government is acting within its constitutional
limits They stated the following 3 were supreme law of the land Constitution Laws of the national
government Treaties Judges in every state had to obey the Constitution even if state laws or
constitutions directly contradicted it Tenth Amendment: the constitutional amendment stating, "The
powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are
reserved to the states

The Importance Of Constitutional Democracy
The citizens of the United States of America, under a constitutional democracy, are being ruled by a
government with the key political values of liberty, equality, and democracy. While the American
government is limited in what it can control and how it uses that control, struggles have risen and
there have been conflicts that have continued throughout time and into our present stem from the
inconsistencies surrounding leadership, structure, and the policies of government and the way, at
times, one or more of these values are sustained, leaving the remaining of these values nullified.
Under our constitutional democracy, American citizens can, in many states and localities, vote
directly upon their local laws, and are afforded the opportunity to vote at all levels of government,
for the top officials, to effect change to contend with political conflict(s). While unity and harmony
are the ideal goals, they are not often achieved for various reasons, one being the lack of voter turn–
out and participation, as the level of confidence in our government and our elected officials varies
with each political issue. One aspect related to voter confidence can be drawn from the perspective
of the historical conundrum faced by citizens, lawmakers, and politicians alike, under a federal
system in which cooperation and the allocation of responsibilities across our varied levels of
government seems to remain in constant debate. While power is shared with the lower levels of
government by

The Real Constitutional Convention
Our Constitutional Convention was affected by many things prior to the event. Many discussions
were arranged in order to set up alliances and partnerships. As a Southern Plantation owner, my
group had many preliminary discussions and we formed an agreement with the Bankers, Workers,
and the Farmers. These discussions were necessary because my group needed to form agreements
and get others to vote for our cause and this could only be arranged if we held preliminary
discussions, which we did. There are many lessons to be taught when it comes to preliminary
discussions. Before discussing any topics, you need to know who to confer with. Say you need to
discuss about slavery, you wouldn't talk to the slaves, your best option would to be to talk to the
farmers. Also, when setting up agreements you need to make sure that any previous agreements
don't interfere with your current agreement. For example, you made a deal with the Bankers that
payment in kind ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Five different factions participated in our Constitutional Convention, bankers, workers, farmers,
Southern plantation owners, slaves. Our Constitutional Convention had a different outcome than the
actual Constitutional convention due to the factions that participated. A big difference between these
conventions is that the poor folk or the "rabble." The real Constitutional Convention consisted of
rich white men who were not fit to represent most of the people. Unlike our convention, we had a
variety of people participating in the event and most of the people were represented by people such
as the farmers, workers, and slaves. With these factions they made decisions more favorable to the
people, and this way the laws made will be preferred by the majority of the people. In summary, the
factions that participated in our Constitutional Convention made resolutions that favored the

Constitutional Democracy
Constitutional Democracy The basic premise of a constitutional democracy is that government has
rules and all of the people have voices. Through free and fair elections we elect candidates to
represent us. The Constitution of the United States guarantees us the right to do this, and to live
democratically. The framers attacked tyrannical government and advanced the following ideas: that
government comes from below, not from above, and that it derives its powers from the consent of
the governed; that men have certain natural, inalienable rights; that it is wise and feasible to
distribute and balance powers within government, giving local powers to local governments, and
general powers to the national government; that men are born ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
While every American can be denied almost nothing because of race, color, national origin, religion,
sex, familial status, or disability, a lot of Americans aren't in the position to be discriminated against.
This means that many Americans do not have the opportunity to fully exercise their liberty. Personal
liberty is freedom. It means all persons must be given the opportunity to realize their own goals. It
translates to self– determination. The Constitution states all people have the right to life, liberty and
freedom. This is a bit idealistic because one person's liberty may infringe upon another person's
freedom. Take abortion for example. Although it is legal and feminists consider it liberty, it takes
away another persons freedom to life. The Constitution did not provide protection of rights to the
unborn. Another issue, if a person has a right to life and self–determination, do they have a right to
end their life if they are in severe pain and suffrage? Dr. Jack Kevorkian provides assisted suicide,
but it is not legal. Why is it deemed legal to kill an innocent child on a whim or for any reason, but
illegal to kill yourself if you are in constant turmoil? There are conflicts that will not be resolved for
a long time, but one political process which is not in controversy is the right to vote in free and fair
elections. They are held with the premise that opposition will be loyal. The winning party will not
interfere

Constitutional Convention Dbq
The Constitution wasn't fair and was poorly made so they had to create a new one. The Congress
started off by adding improvements but it needed too many improvements they had to start over. If
they hadn't started over the Constitution Would not have been as good, and there would still be
poorly written parts. The new constitution was called the Constitutional Convention. People
complained that their Liberty was being taken away and they wanted it back the Congress thought
about the complaints and decide to consider revising the Constitution. The revising turned into the
Constitutional Convention.
There are many more causes of the Constitutional Convention. For example, Daniel Shay led an
uprising against high state taxes. Rebels stopped ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
For example, the Bill of Rights was created. The Bill of Right are ten amendments made to protect
people's rights. This make people feel that they could trust and rely on the government. The people
likes the Bill of Rights because it gave them more Liberty to do what they wanted. Also two parties
were formed because of creating the Constitutional Convention. The two parties were called the
Anti–Federalists and the Federalists. These two parties have different opinions for the people to
choose from. The Federalists agreed with strong central government, and the Anti–Federalists
disagreed with a strong central government. The people got to choose which side of the party they
wanted to

Essay about Absolutism vs. Constitutional Monarchy
In the upcoming United States Presidential Election it is possible to see a woman become elected as
President. This would be a first for the United States and also for most of the world. Throughout the
world different types of governments have survived, faulted, or have been altered. Many of these
governments came from early European countries. Two of the most popular types of governments to
come from Europe are Constitutional Monarchy and Absolutism. Traces of Constitutional Monarchy
and Absolutism are still seen today in different parts of the world. Constitutional Monarchy and
Absolutism have its roots set in England and France respectively. Much of original regulations that
have been put in place by these governments have ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Much of the English goods were imported from other countries as well. Beginning in the mid
seventeenth century England went through many changes including moving to a commercial and
urbanizing country. The first set of changes occurred as England began producing different types of
goods. Originally England was making thick types of clothes that were made for the colder
weathers. In the late seventeenth century lighter fabrics began to be created. As the change shifted in
clothing construction, goods of other markets began taking over the industry. "A wide range of
English products replaced imports on the English market and began to compete successfully
abroad." This shift to exporting goods instead of importing greatly improved England's economy.
These goods included sugar, glass, pottery, iron, ships, and different typed of mined goods. Instead
of paying to import these goods, England began exporting goods and bringing in a huge amount of
money to the English economy. As the economy began to boom, a change in the way society lived
had also changed. Instead of living in large cities, citizens began moving outward in the urban areas
further away. Although most of the urbanization movement can be contributed to the raise in
population, there were also many other changes that were occurring. Stagecoaches began having
more frequent routes to all of the major cities and also most of the smaller outlying cities.

Is The Us Constitution Constitutional Or Constitutional
The Constitution of the United States has been analysed and interpreted to fit a thousand mouths.
Every scholar has their own opinion of the deeply important text. Each and every one also has
different views on the War Powers Act, if it is Constitutional or not. The War Powers act is
unconstitutional. The Constitution clearly defines the role of the president in foreign policy, and
does not need to be amended, and it also clearly states the role of Congress in military action, and
the Supreme Court has upheld expanded interpretation of the president's authority in matters of
foreign policy.
Article II, Section 1 vests the executive power in a single person, the President of the united States.
Under Article I, Congress only has the legislative powers "herein granted". This power engages the
President to the authority of all foreign affairs, including war, (except ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Article II, Section 2 of the US Constitution names the president as "Commander in Chief of the
Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the
actual Service of the United States." It gives the President the sole constitutional power to engage in
foreign aggression. By contrast, in Article I, Section 10, the Constitution prohibits states from
"engag[ing] in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay"
unless they have obtained the "Consent of Congress." No such limitation for the president about the
expression of war. Article II lets the President have power over foreign relations, like the making of
treaties and the appointment of ambassadors, but only with the consent of Congress. The
constitution has no such check on military use. But, Congress does have the power to

The Constitutional Legal Field For A Greater...
Many scholars in the constitutional legal field for numerous reasons have argued the
conceptualisation of standing. The law of standing establishes a series of rules that ultimately
determine whether a person who starts legal proceedings is the proper person to do so. Scholars
including Patrick Keyzer, Simon Evans as well as Grand Chief Charles Grand Chief Fox all have
individual standpoints on how standing can be altered to for a greater constitutional justice.
Throughout this essay it shall be argued that the standing tests that are prevalent in today's
constitutional environment limit those that could have grounds for standing but are unable to seek
constitutional justice, and how it specifically affects indigenous Australians. When approaching
standing from Keyzer and Evans' standpoints and expanding upon their notions, it can be observed
that slightly altering the definition of standing and the tests that insinuate individuals have special
interest within cases broadens the scope to allow for an inclusion of the indigenous populations and
interest groups. This is one of the ways in which standing can be modified to be more lenient and
allow for a broader approach to standing. Additionally, the arguments that Keyzer and Evans push
highlight standing within Australia, while on the other hand Grand Chief Fox investigates the effects
that standing has and its impact within Canada, these ideas assessed to investigate if Australia can
follow the model of standing Canada has

Debates Of The Constitutional Convention
One of the first debates after the war was held at the Constitutional Convention. The Constitutional
Convention was held in Philadelphia, May of 1787. The meetings discussed about the government
under the Articles of Confederation. The convention started with Governor Edmund Randolph, also
drafted by James Madison, suggested the Virginia Plan. The Virginia Plan was made to suggest a
new form of government. The Virginia Plan discussed fifteen ideas. The bicameral legislature,
which meant two houses of representatives would support both house by each states' population.
The branches would have all the power that Congress had. The branches would not do trading or
tax, but rather collect tax and make and enforce laws. The big states were the ones

Constitutional Convention
My instruction helped my students develop skills regarding critical evaluation of different accounts
of the historical debates dealt with during the constitutional convention. I did this by providing my
students with strong instruction which included two sources on the matter, one primary source and
one secondary source. The reason I did one primary and one secondary source is because now my
students have knowledge on the subject from someone who experienced these events first hand and
they can see how similar or different that information is from an historian's perspective. One of the
main ways I helped my students build and support their arguments was by first modeling for them
how I wanted them to take notes on the bucketing worksheet. On the smartboard, I placed a model
of their bucketing worksheet that I filled ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
I observed that my students were still engaged once they moved on to the secondary source, and that
they could work successfully on their skills as individuals. The scaffolding of my lessons also
allowed the students to develop the skills of interpretation and analysis in relation to accounts of
historical events. By taking these notes on their bucketing worksheet, students were building support
for the arguments they would use during the upcoming debate. They were gathering evidence to
support or reject the constitution. After this activity, each student will have facts to support their side
of the argument. This scaffold will help the students when they start to research their other debate
topics independently. Once they were given their sides of all the debates during the constitutional
convention they were ready to find facts that supported their side of the argument. Another way I
helped my students build and support their arguments was by providing them with feedback. This
starts at 4:15 in my first video

The Australian Government: A Federal Constitutional Monarchy
The Australian government is federalism. There are six states and two territories (the northern
territory and the capital territory), states with the governor and in charge of state affairs. The
Australian government is composed of house majority or coalition, every government office for
three years. The cabinet is the government's highest decision–making authority, is now a total of 30
ministers. The country's supreme administrative leader is prime minister.
Australia is a federal constitutional monarchy. The head of state is monarch Australia. Australia
governor is not representative of Australia, for Australia monarchy under the Australian constitution
to replace the sovereign to exercise their functions and powers. The current head of

Overview of Constitutional Monarchy in England
Constitutional Monarchy in England How did the constitutional monarchy triumph in England? The
way that the constitutional monarchy was able to succeed in England is based on: geographic
location and the power of the army. In the case of geographic location, it was more difficult for the
king to raise a large army. This is because England was protected from a number of potential threats
as an island. Over the centuries, this made it difficult for the king to raise an independent military
force outside of the nobility. Instead, he had to work aristocrats and powerful landowners to create a
military. This reduced the power of the king by forcing him to give more authority to Parliament.
They are an institution that was established to control the power of monarchy. This is significant by
showing how the king had fewer options in working with the nobility. As a result, this forced him to
share power with Parliament in order to maintain control. Once this happened, is the point that
Parliament began to exercise its authority in a number of areas. (Hirst, 1998, pp. 3 14) The power of
the army is ultimately what gave Parliament its legitimacy. This is because the king and Parliament
had been fighting for years over issues such as: taxation, the passage of laws and consultation. These
areas created animosity between the different sides, with the king attempting to dissolve Parliament.
This occurred with parliamentary supporters who believed that the power of the king must be

The Constitutional Court Of The Constitution
With the creation of the Constitutional Court in the Constitution of 1991 of Colombia, this became
the highest court of constitutionality. In practice this meant that from that moment the constitutional
jurisdiction is special. The Constitutional Court as a Constitutional Court has competence know of
actions of unconstitutionality of the legal norms that have the material force of law and at the same
time, the power to review the actions of tutela. Guardianship actions stand by violation of the
fundamental rights of persons, judicial mechanism which entered into force with the new
Constitution. In the case of actions of tutela his selection by the Constitutional Court is
discretionary. The purpose of the Colombian constitutional system is materially comprehensive
control allowing the defence and guarantee of the Basic Statute of the State, as well as the
effectiveness of the rights of the people. In this essay, I would like to analyze some sentences of
supervision of the Constitutional Court brought by the defenders of the rights of this population or
Afro–Colombian people. These statements show how the Court has been developing the concept of
equality and the principle of non–racial discrimination at the time. Only were cases of guardianship,
this being the expected judicial mechanism when there is a breach or breach of fundamental rights.
Cases that show took place for the violation of individual and collective rights of Afro–Colombians.
We will describe the elements of

Constitutional Arrangement
The U.S. "Arrangement" The development of a constitutional arrangement can be seen as committed
to reason if one takes the Charters of Freedom. The Charters of Freedom are The Declaration of
Independence, The Constitution, and The Bill of Rights. In particular, this commitment to reason is
reflected in a catalogue of rights that every citizen can claim against the state. Indeed, the U.S.
Constitution's Bill of Rights provides a ground for developing of a community that is based on
articulated reason at both individual and systemic levels. The catalogue of rights not only provides
people with the protection of the rights that they deem valuable but also provides them with a tool to
order their political affairs. In Preamble, for example, "good

Australia 's Constitutional Democracy And The Federal System
Throughout this essay, a comparison of both Australia's constitutional democracy and the federal
republic system in the United States will take place. Australia and the United States are both a part
of the federal system. Within the federal system, the national and state governments divide the
power in order to govern (Parliamentary Education Office, 2016). Both Australia and the United
States have two chambers, the House of Representatives and the Senate. Parliament Education
office, (2016) states that there are numerous similarities between these two countries, for example,
both these nations decide on the making of legal guidelines for their government. However,
Australia and the United States have different forms of government and this affects how the political
system is managed. Australia is a constitutional monarchy, in which the queen is the head of the
state (ABC, 2004), and the United States is the federal republic where the President is the head of
state (Parliamentary Education Office, 2016). A constitution is a formal structure for the state and
specifies the power and institutions of the central government and its relationship with different
levels. Additionally, it expresses the rights of citizens and creates limits on the government (Hague
& Harrop, 2013). In a republic government, the people and their elected representative have the
power and there may be an elected or nominated president (Stevenson, 2010). A constitutional
democracy and the federal republic

Monarchy Vs. Constitutional Monarchy
Absolute Monarchy vs Constitutional Monarchy
The difference between absolute monarchy and constitutional monarchy is that in the absolute
monarchy, the monarch holds the supreme or absolute powers, whereas in the constitutional
monarchy, the head of state is a hereditary or elected monarch.
The law within a constitutional monarchy might be different from the law within an absolute
monarchy. Differences between absolute and constitutional monarchies emerged during the
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries when many European countries experimented with absolutism
and constitutional monarchies.
Absolute monarchy is also called undemocratic monarchy and constitutional monarchy is also called
a liberal monarchy. In the absolute monarchy, the king ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Sweden, Malaysia, Luxemburg and Jordan are among the
nations that have constitutional or limited monarchy system whereas Brunei, Saudi Arabia, Vatican
City, Swaziland, Oman and Qatar are some of the few nations that still have absolute monarchs.
Summary:
1. Absolute monarchy or undemocratic monarchy transmits absolute powers to the monarch who
acts as a dictator or head of the state.
2. Constitutional monarchy or liberal monarchy gives limited powers to the monarch as in the
monarchy of England.
3. In the constitutional monarchy, the prime minister of the state holds the maximum powers and
political effectiveness.
4. Absolute monarchs were initiated due to holy wars and the decline of the church.
5. Constitutional monarchy was initiated when the monarchs emerged as irresponsible and careless
leaders.
Absolute Monarchy in France: Louis XIV
An Absolute Monarch Rises Soon after Louis XIV became king, disorder again swept France. In an
uprising called the Fronde, nobles, merchants, peasants, and the urban poor each rebelled in order to
protest royal power or preserve their own. On one occasion, rioters drove the boy king from his
palace. It was an experience Louis would never forget. When Mazarin died in 1661, the 23–year–old
Louis resolved to take complete control over the government himself. "I have been pleased to
entrust the government of my affairs to the

Constitutional Issues
Question #1: What are the Constitutional issues present, and how do they affect the Political, Social,
and Economic Issues of the Country? Within this fact pattern the Constitutional issues in this
question that are present: the Aliens are being denied Due Process, have been denied the Right to
their Fundamental Rights, have no access to Equal Protection, have also been targeted as Enemy
Combatants and have no right to run their own mining operations. Their mining operations were the
sole purpose of them coming to the United States and becoming citizens, which was agreed upon by
the Government. These issues at hand are also major issues which fall under many Domestic issues
within the United States, "which are directly related to all issues ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
In Gerber v. Hickman, "the Gerber court held that the right to procreate survives incarceration. The
court cited Safely "as an example of how a right related to marriage and family may be exercised in
prison despite a prisoner's inability to carry out the 'typical' marriage while in prison' and Skinner for
the proposition that "at a minimum, a prisoner while in prison cannot be deprived of his ability to
procreate upon release, rights survive while he is in prison." (Gerber v. Hickman, 264 F.3d 882 (9th
Cir. 2001)) The question within the Gerber Court was does fundamental rights exist or become
restricted while a citizen is in fact imprisoned? They answered no, by proving your fundamental
rights does not die completely, some "constitutional rights survive incarceration." (Gerber v.
Hickman, 264 F.3d 882 (9th Cir. 2001)) Procreation is to keep the human/alien race going on for
future generations, and should never be taken away by

Constitutional Amendments
The constitution of the United States of America is a very important document in American History
and World History. Our constitution is unique in so many ways that many other countries have tried
to replicate our system of democracy. The US Constitution was written by our founding fathers. The
constitution includes the Bill of Rights which are the first ten amendments to The Constitution.
These were certain guarantees for people's rights. Over the course of decades more amendments
were added to the constitution, to create a well written platform which represents our country's need
for reform as we evolve as Americans. There are amendments that are extremely important to each
individual citizen of the US, and there are amendments that may ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Therefore, I believe that the Second Amendment should be omitted from the Constitution:
Amendment 2 – Bearing Arms. The second Amendment reads: "A well regulated Militia, being
necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
infringed". What does this Amendment mean to us in the 21st century? We do not have militia and
therefore do have to bear arms. So why are American's having such a problem with gun control? The
second amendment is vague and does not say American's can or cannot own guns. Therefore a lot of
Americans do own guns. I believe the second Amendment should be removed from the Constitution
because people use guns and weapons irresponsibly. There are high incidents of deaths due to
privately owned guns getting into the hands of children, adolescents and unlicensed individuals.
There are more incidences of crimes. It is confusing. Who can actually carry a gun or firearm,
military or private individual? The right to bear arms is such a controversial topic and may leave
many people feeling not at ease. Better gun control laws should be effectuated. Maybe the Second
Amendment can be revised. "Professor Tribe's asserts that the history of the Amendment "indicate[s]
that the central concern of [its] framers was to prevent such federal interferences with the state
militia as would permit the establishment of a standing national army and the consequent destruction
of local autonomy." (http://www.constitution.org/mil/embar2nd.htm) "He argues that the qualifying
phrase "'well regulated" makes any invocation of the Amendment as a restriction on state or local
gun control measures extremely problematic."

What Are Constitutional Rights?
In the United States of America, it is no surprise that the month of November is full of different
political views and debates. Supporting and defending ones political beliefs is very important to
many people. Many times we can question however if there is a time and place for talking about
politics. In the situation that we are presented with, a new worker at Everhappy Corp. was wearing a
political button. The boss saw it and demanded that the worker took it out of the office or else they
would be fired. In this essay, we will be answering whether or not it the boss violates the workers
constitutional rights. So what are constitutional rights? Constitutional rights are rights who have
protection from government interference by order of the

Constitutional Interpretation Essay
The debate on Constitutional interpretation is far from a new one. For years, the argument over how
the Constitution should be read has varied, from the strict textualist approach to the most lenient, the
instrumentalist position. The Constitution has long been referred to in terms of being a living or
dead document, and its interpretation has significant ramifications on this country's legal climate.
This paper will analyze and compare two different forms of Constitutional interpretation:
originalism and activism. While the intent of the Framers should certainly not be ignored in reading
and applying the Constitution's words, it is important to view the document with a certain degree of
modernity. The originalist approach towards ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He posits that each word is the result of arduous argument between the Framers and that to take an
approach that doesn't view the Constitution with the intent of the Framers in mind is to ignore the
document's meaning. Perhaps his most persuasive attack on the activist position was his argument
against the use of penumbras, a concept heavily used by the Supreme Court in Griswold v.
Connecticut. "Specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from
those guarantees that help give them life and substance. Various guarantees create zones of privacy. .
.retained by the people." Meese swiftly combats this idea by mocking the very nature of penumbras
and their use. He writes, "Instead they have grounded their rulings in appeals to social theories, to
moral philosophies or personal notions of human dignity, or to 'penumbras,' somehow emanating
ghostlike from various provisions –identified and not identified – in the Bill of Rights." This is a
logically sound point that aptly points out a major flaw of the penumbral argument – if this
interpretation doesn't come from the body of the Constitution, let alone the Framers' intent, there is
no Constitutional interpretation happening whatsoever.
Meese's argument greatly falters, however, when he admits that the Framers could not foresee all
issues that would arise for judicial review. This simple sentiment effectively invalidates the rest of
his argument by admitting

The Constitutional Convention Of The Constitution
Most of the framers of the constitution either attended or graduated college, were involved in the
American Revolution, and had already been involved in the government. The Constitutional
Convention was a meeting held in Philadelphia between May and September of 1787. There,
delegates discussed revisions to the United States Government. The Constitutional Convention was
held in order to address the problems of the weak central government that existed under the Articles
of Confederation. Many of the ideas that were written into the United States Constitution were
influenced and based on many important factors. The Enlightenment, colonial grievances listed in
the Declaration of Independence, and failures of the Articles of Confederation were major factors
and influences of the United States Constitution.
The Enlightenment, a period in history, which consisted of advances in philosophy, society and
politics, greatly affected the United States Constitution. John Locke, a key figure in the
Enlightenment, published Two Treatises on Government in 1689. In it, he challenged the belief that
monarchs receive their authority to rule directly from God. Locke stated that the government should
receive its power from the consent of the people through the election process. This idea of popular
sovereignty is included in the Constitution because as colonists, the citizens did not have a say in
choosing representatives under British rule. In the Constitution, citizens have the right to vote,

Constitutional Law
Constitutional law
The Mauritian Parliament has inherited much from the Westminster Model.
The Westminster Model is characterised by: * Parliamentary Sovereignty * Separation of Powers
between the organs of the State.
A. Parliamentary Sovereignty
In any state you will find one ultimate source of legal authority. In countries with a written
constitution, it will be the constitution which has ultimate authority as in Mauritius. In the United
Kingdom, with its uncodified constitution, ultimate law–making power lies with Parliament, the
House of Commons, House of Lords and the Crown. As A.V. Dicey expressed it, parliamentary
sovereignty or supremacy, is the cornerstone of the constitution.
A.V. Dicey's analysis of sovereignty
In ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In essence, Montesquieu states that the three organs of government – the executive, legislature and
judiciary – should each have a discrete and defined area of power and that there should be a clear
demarcation of functions between them: this is true 'separation of powers'.
Under a written constitution, like Mauritius, the powers allocated to various institutions are clearly
defined. It should be noted that even under a written constitution a complete separation of powers is
not possible, and that without some degree of interaction between the institutions there would be
constitutional deadlock.
In Mauritius there is no strict separation of power between the executive and the legislative organs
of the State. Ministers are at the same time members of the executive and members of the
legislature.
Structure of Parliament
In England, it is characterized by its bicameralism – ie two houses of Parliament.
In Mauritius, there is a single chamber.
The Mauritian Parliament comprises of 70 Members
Section 31. Parliament of Mauritius
(2) The Assembly shall consist of persons elected in accordance with the First
Schedule, which makes provision for the election of 70 members
Functions of Parliament

The main functions of Parliament include the passing of legislation and the scrutiny of the
administration through debate,

The Constitutional Federalism Of Canada
Canada as a country was founded on the constitutional premise of federalism, a governmental
system in which the federal and provincial governments are equal and separate entities together in
political coalition. Quebec joined Confederation in 1867 on the constitutional promise of equality.
French–speaking Canadians were assured provincial control of their social programs, health, and
education. The premise of shared sovereignty acknowledged the variation between distinct peoples
in Canada and their particular political culture's. On May 14th, 1980 former Liberal Prime Minister
of Canada Pierre Elliott Trudeau delivered his final speech in his campaign against former Quebec
Premier, Rene Levesque's referendum on separation from Canada. ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Former Prime Minister Trudeau cleverly disguised the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as
a heroic constitutional amendment providing universal individual and minority rights, in order to
effectively cloak the embedded attack on Quebec–Nationalism, through the Charter of Rights and
Freedoms assimilative properties. Further, The Charter of Rights and Freedoms lacked recognition
and consideration in regard to Quebec's expressed dissatisfaction with the current state of federalism
in Canada. The issues were the absence of recognition for Quebec as a distinct society within
Canada, the consolidation and centralization of greater power to the federal government, and the
lessening of powers held by the provincial government. Trudeau Sr.'s personal disdain for Quebec
nationalism and his attempts to extinguish it, caused him to overlook the reality of Quebec 's
political culture, and the impossibility of transforming a society through change to the constitution.
Following Trudeau's attempts at constitutional reform in Canada, former Prime Minister Brian
Mulroney's Progressive Conservatives would attempt reconciliation to mend Quebec Canada
relations. Ultimately ending in failure leading to greater French unrest in Canada. This essay will
demonstrate the impact of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as a falsely conceived
strategy to remediate Quebec–Canada (French–English) relations, and scale the damage to the

Constitutional Limits
This week's study of Constitutional Limits has presented before this group of students a
correlational objective between the vagueness doctrine and due process clauses. Can we have one
without the other? If not, why? According to Brody and Acker (2010, p.28), citizens must be made
aware of laws in order to abide by them. A person cannot be expected to abide by laws of society, if
those laws have not been provided to the public. In the case of Lambert v. California (1958), a
person who has been convicted of a felony cannot reside in the city of Los Angeles past five days
without registering. Failure to do so, can and will result in additional charges. If the law was not
posted, in plain sight, for all citizens to be able to see, would it ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Citizens must be provided with notice, in writing, in order to be held accountable for abiding by the
rules. The example that Brody and Acker (2010) gave in our reading this week was a driver
exceeding the speed limit. If the driver had not traveled down that road before, it is possible that
they were unaware of the specific speed limit. Regardless, the officer has the ability to write a ticket
for the infraction. The driver has the ability to fight the ticket in court, thus providing them due
process.
Under due process, the fifth and fourteenth Amendments are ensuring that every individual is
afforded the opportunity that ensures that a citizen has the ability to have their procedural rights
intact. According to Williams (2010, p.415), due process is the most fundamental right afforded to a
person in the United States. Without it, citizens could be left at the mercy of unfair courts and vague
laws.
The fact remains that both due process and the vagueness doctrine are intertwined with one another.
Whether that is through not having particular laws posted, for the public to see, even if they are from
decades ago, to being afforded basic rights of due

The Constitutional Convention
How did the United States Constitution come about? This short paper on the Federalist Papers will
explain how the Constitutional Convention in 1787 used them to assist in the writing and subsequent
ratification of the Constitution. The Federalist Papers were actually 85 letters written to newspapers
in the later 1780's to urge in the ratification of the Constitution. Ratification was needed by 9 of the
13 States.
Once the Constitution was written in Philadelphia to replace the ineffectual Articles of
Confederation, the act of ratification began.
There ensued a nationwide debate over constitutional principles, and the press was inundated with
letters condemning or praising the document, among them these articles, signed "Publius." The three
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Unlike the Articles of Confederation; the Constitution empowered the Federal Government to act
firmly in the interest of the Nation. A representative Congress could aid with economic and political
issues, because any legislation would have to be subjected to a Presidential veto and Judicial
Review.
The Constitution had a Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Branch. Each of these had enumerated
powers given to them in the Constitution. "This system of checks and balances and the
Constitution's clear delineation of the powers of the federal government–few, limited, and defined,
as Madison put it–would protect states' rights and, as they saw it, individual rights." (History.com,
2017)
1.
The Bill of Rights writing and passage would come later, but the Federalist Papers were also
instrumental in writing those Rights too. Madison distrusted a powerful government, calling it: "the
superior force of an interested and overbearing majority." Many of the constitutional provisions they
praised were intended precisely to dampen democratic "excesses." The articles, written in the spirit
both of propaganda and of logical argument, probably had little influence on public opinion of the
day." (History.com,

Absolutism vs Constitutional Monarchy
Compare and contrast the theories and practice of absolutism and constitutional monarchy during
the 17th century. The seventeenth century saw the evolution of two new types of government mainly
because of the instability that was caused by religious wars. One type of government was a
constitutional monarchy in which rulers were confined to the laws of the state, giving the people
some liberties, best exemplified by William and Mary during the Stuart monarchial rule.
Constitutional monarchy was successful in mainly in England because of the Magna Carta, which
kept the king's power in check. The other type was absolute monarchy, in which the king has power
over everything, shown by the French under Louis XIV. Although these two ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
The parliamentary system allowed kings to be more aware of the different regions and customs of
the population, therefore allowing them to have more freedoms. Also, the gentry could advise the
king on issues such as war and taxes so he would know what is unfair to the population, where if he
was absolute, he could make whatever tax he wanted. Parliament also allowed for the separation of
power into judicial and legislative branches, further strengthening the government because the two
areas would not be headed solely by the monarch. Structures such as the Bill of Rights and the
system of checks allowed constitutional monarchies to rule more efficiently at the end of the 17th
century and on to the

The Absolute And Constitutional Governments During The...
During the seventeenth century Europe witnessed two prominent forms of government, an absolutist
and a limited/constitutional. Both governments were constructed through several key figures that
were in control of the countries, some more stable than others. Although these key figures tried to
dominate the government under absolute authority their control was still limited. Absolutists
monarchies were trying to be established all over the country, unfortunately many of them failed due
to various factors. Throughout the seventeenth century Europe rulers have tried to maintain an
absolutist monarchy however society still found some holes in their power, which limited the ruler's
control. The absolute and constitutional governments were two very different governments in
practice, but also maintained similar characteristics in both systems of government. The differences
between both governments emerged during the sixteenth and seventeenth century when Europeans
began to experiment with absolutism and constitution monarchies. An absolute monarchy can be
defined as the monarch, king or queen, holds the supreme or absolute powers and rule is based on
divine right. In other words, the king received their power from God, so he only had to answer to
God not parliament. The king is entitled to make all economic and other state related decisions for
the country, while the prime minister exercises effective political power. Absolutism began with the
decline of the church and

Two Constitutional Presidencies
In Jeffrey K. Tulis's work "Two Constitutional Presidencies" he argues that there are two
constitutional presidencies, one being an uppercase "Constitutional" presidency and one being a
lowercase "constitutional presidency". The "Constitutional" presidency is the presidency as defined
by the original writers of the constitution and the "constitutional" presidency is the presidency
defined by Woodrow Wilson's political thought. Tulis claims that the founding fathers wanted the
president to review the laws that congress passes and act as a clerk while Woodson believed the
president should act more like a leader and be proactive in determining the country's direction. Some
of the main point supporting the founding fathers interpretation of president ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
Tulis argues that Wilson believed the president should have more of an active role in government.
Instead of just checking Congress' work the president's role, Wilson argues, was to take public
opinion, turn it into legislation and present it to Congress. In this way the President acts more like a
leader. When responding to the founding fathers original interpretation of president Tulis argues that
Wilson stressed that the need for a President to lead the country outweighed the risk incurred the
chance of demagoguery. In Tulis work he writes that Wilson had two ways of preventing the
president from becoming a demagogue. First Wilson hoped that his doctrine had the ethic of being a
leader that's looking out for the best interest of the people rather than a demagogue looking out for
his own self–interest and the public's ability to judge the president's character and tell if his
intentions are good. Tulis does point out some weaknesses in Wilson's argument because Wilson
claims that he doesn't understand why former publics had fallen to a demagogue. Overall Tulis
makes it clear that Wilson's argument to counter the founding fathers fear of a demagogue was a
little weak, "Wilson's assurance against demagogues may seem unsatisfactory because they did not
adequately distinguish the polity in which he worked from others in which demagogue's have
prevailed" (Nelson 2014, 21). While Wilson couldn't assure the rise of a demagogue, Tulis makes it
clear that Wilson thought the imperativeness of the president as a leader was more important than
preventing the rise of a demagogue. Tulis does a superb job in summarizing Wilson's theory of the
role of the

Australian Constitutional Monarchy
Introduction
The only system of governance which has been used in Australia since federation in 1901 has been a
Constitutional Monarchy. Within this system there is a constitution, which determines and limits the
role of government in Australian society; there is a monarch, who inherits the role of Head of State
from his or her parent; and there is a parliament where elected members sit to create and vote on
legislation. However, in the 1980s and 1990s a new political movement gained a large amount of
popularity in Australia. This movement endorsed changing Australia's system of government to a
semi–presidential republic. This systems most commonly recognised difference is the removal of the
monarch as the Head of State and a president as the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The constitutional monarchy has served Australia well for over 110 years, and we should not change
it, due to potential risks associated with doing so, such as politicising the role of the Head of State of
Australia.
The constitutional monarchy means Australia a non–political Head of State, this would change if a
republic model was adopted. Queen Elizabeth, as well as other past monarchs, have not had a
political role in the governance of the country. The introduction of an elected Head of State would
mean that Australia would have to have a Head of State who plays a political role, which is
considered by many to be negative, because traditionally only members of parliament have played
political roles in Australia's governance.
Australia has close ties to its monarch which should not be removed. Australia and the United
Kingdom have a strong international relationship, which is partially due to the strength caused by
sharing a Head of State. If Australia removes the Queen as its Head of State, this will likely weaken
its relationship with the United Kingdom, who is considered to be one of our closest

Constitutional Law
Hamdi v. Rumsfeld
Issue
When a U.S. citizen is labeled as an enemy combatant, is he entitled to the constitutional protections
of due process?
Holding and Reasoning(O'Connor, J.)
Yes. A U.S. citizen accused of being an enemy combatant must be afforded an opportunity to be
heard by a neutral decision maker. The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution guarantees the
right to due process under the law. Furthermore, absent suspension, all persons detained in the
United States have the right to habeas corpus. This means that an individual accused of criminal
activity cannot be detained indefinitely, with no trial, no counsel, and no ability to petition for
freedom if he is wrongfully imprisoned. In the case of a citizen, like Hamdi, who is ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
United States started during World War II, when President Roosevelt passed Executive Order 9066
to command the placement of Japanese residents and Japanese citizens who were staying or located
in the United States into special facilities where they were excluded from the general population.
Isolating people from the general population for no good reason is a direct violation of the 14th
Amendment to the United States Constitution. To defend this aggressive action, President Roosevelt
explained that the order was passed to prevent internal damages or sabotage that may have been
caused by individuals who supported Japan. Roosevelt separated Japanese people because he didn't
want them banning together in a time of war. Japan was a primary enemy of the United States
during this time; Roosevelt believed that separation was the best way to contain an uprising. The
case of Korematsu v. United States deals with military law. This aspect of law is a legal field within
Federal Law, which addresses the activity and behavior of military personnel, including issues of
treason, war crimes and criminal offenses directed towards military personnel. Korematsu stood up
against the forced imprisonment of Japanese people because the government did not differentiate
between Japanese extremists or American citizens who happened to be of Japanese descent.
Korematsu was one of these American citizens who was forcefully removed from his home and his
everyday life and taken to a prison

Constitutional Compromise
Hook – There is nothing more mentally straining then to be here at the Constitutional Convention,
where we are deciding our country's fate. It's one question, "Should we ratify the Constitution or
not?" yet it is difficult because our decisions here make a huge impact on the future of the United
States. Introduction – Greetings my dear delegates, I am John Dickinson and I am speaking on
behalf of Delaware. As you may have known, I have previously been on the assembly of the lower
country's, well educated in politics, and have received an honorary LLD College of New Jersey.
Body #1 – To get started, let's examine the ⅗ Compromise. It has come to my attention that the
argument of how representation in congress should be valued whether through

Constitutional Rights
Constitutional Rights
Constitutional Rights are afforded to every American Citizen by the first ten amendments to the
Constitution or more commonly known as The Bill of Rights. The fourth amendment of The Bill of
Rights applies to all and states, "the right of the people to be secure in their persons" (para.4). When
a person accepts a position anywhere, whether at a small family owned grocery store or a major
corporation, one does so with the understanding that some inalienable rights will be given up. This
paper examines if an employer can crush those rights by using lie detector tests, monitor employee
phone calls and emails; use surveillance cameras, and issue random drug–testing.
Drug–Testing
The American Civil ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Most school violence takes the form of minor attacks although, some incidents are more critical.
Middle school students are more than twice as likely as high school students to be affected by school
violence. The average victim of harassment or robbery at school is a male in the seventh grade who
is attacked by a boy his own age (Constitutional Rights Foundation–W.M. Keck).
E–Mail Privacy
The legality of monitoring e–mail in the workplace is not a clear cut situation. The law on the
subject of employers ' right to employee e–mails evolves as fast as the speed of technology these
days. Federal law prohibits the unauthorized capture of electronic communications. If this law is
violated, persons are subject to civil and criminal penalties. However, when electronic
communications are downloaded to any company 's computer, the electronic communication is
subject to control by the employer.
The company 's policy should contain specific terms to inform the employee that information on the
company computers are confidential and this acknowledges the company the right to access any
information from his computer at any time. They are at liberty to review and monitor any computers
content. However, employers should limit their own access to employee e–mail and computer
content only for legitimate business purposes, such as when there 's a reasonable suspicion of work–
related wrongdoing by the employee, rather than something non–specific or just

Is Privacy As A Constitutional Right?
For my research paper the topic I have chosen to write about is privacy as a constitutional right.
With this topic, I was asked is there really an inherent right to privacy and what does the right
entail? I was also asked to analyze privacy in the work place and how an organization's policy
should conform to the law and best ethical practices. Privacy can be a trick subject since the laws
vary and some are still being developed today. As the workplace and world in general continue to
evolve, so do policies and laws. I will answer all these questions in the following paragraphs.
Constitutional Right The America Civil Liberties Union state that "The right to privacy is not
mentioned in the Constitution, but the Supreme Court has said that several of the amendments create
this right. One of the amendments is the Fourth Amendment, which stops the police and other
government agents from searching us or our property without "probable cause" to believe that we
have committed a crime. Other amendments protect our freedom to make certain decisions about
our bodies and our private lives without interference from the government..." (ACLU 2016). The
Constitution helps protect our privacy when it comes to certain things. When I worked investigation
for the state of Texas, I always had to ask the family and individuals for permission to enter their
homes. I was not allowed to violate their 4th amendment rights. If I did not ask, I was at risk of
being reprimanded or I could have possibly

The Constitutional Amendment
After the Revolutionary War, American colonists went through a transition that required the
establishment of a new government, which impacted them politically, socially and economically. In
addition, after their unpleasant experience under the tyrannical British government, American
colonists decided to establish a government with balanced powers. This means that they would give
the government enough power to protect the people while maintaining the rights of the people and
the states. Also, even today the United States runs according to those principles which are written in
the Constitutional Amendment. Therefore, as time passed the government has seen the need to
increase the safety of its people by taking away basic unalienable rights and

Constitutional Convention Dbq
Madi Shek VSP 3 After the Articles of Confederation were found to be flawed, the Constitutional
Convention was called in an attempt to fix the still young United States government. During the
Constitutional Convention a new Constitution was formed and then proposed to the people. Mercy
Otis Warren was one of the many Anti Federalists who wanted to reject the Constitution. She feared
that the government would become tyrannical which in her eyes would render the War for
Independence useless. Warren claimed that the proposed Constitution was disloyal to the American
Revolution when she stated that it would "threaten to sweep away the rights for which the brave
sons of America have fought" (Warren 1788). She believed that elements of the Constitution

Constitutional Amendments
Whether it's the local government or the national government, law can be changed through a simple
passing of a bill, however major changes may come through the amending of the state or federal
constitutions. They are similar because they both require constitutional amendments. At the national
level, laws can be changed by executive order or by passing laws. Both require two–thirds of votes
for the first step of the process, then the differences come to play. They are different because
proposed amendments to the Texas Constitution are in the form of joint resolutions instead of bills
and require a vote of two–thirds of the entire membership in each house for adoption. Compared to
the federal government which requires ratification by 3 quarters

New Zealand 's Legal Architecture And Constitutional...
Democracy is government of the people, by the people, for the people. Many theorists believe that
New Zealand has a weak constitutional framework and therefore a weak democratic structure.
However there are many other theorists who state that unwritten constitutions bring flexibility, and
can evolve with modern society. The accuracy of this statement can be evaluated in relation to New
Zealand 's legal architecture and constitutional arrangements.
New Zealand doesn 't have a single codified constitutional document, and it is therefore said to be
'unwritten.' Our flexible constitution can be altered by Parliament, because Parliament is supreme.
New Zealand has a Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) system of government, meaning we have a
majority of minority parties, and this has effected parliamentary sovereignty. Practically, MMP has
caused a change to the system of government, and it may not be as easy in reality to alter the
constitution, this is because consensus would be harder to achieve. "Constitutionalism" and the rule
of law, implies political responsibility to the people through the legislature, elected by the people.
This shows that although in theory New Zealand's democratic structure may look skeletal and
fragile, in practice there are many checks in place that can be said to prevent such weaknesses, these
are provided below.
Our constitutional documents are sourced in many pieces of legislation. The New Zealand
Constitution Act 1852 holds the origins of our

Exemplary Constitutional Democracy
The United States of America for over a century has been an a model of exemplary constitutional
democracy. In order to uphold its reputation the United States has passed laws and created agencies
to make sure the government is transparent. The Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of
1974 (FECA), is one of these. It forms the foundation of current federal campaign finance law in the
United States. FECA's main goal is to put limits on contributions to federal candidates and political
parties, a system for disclosure and voluntary public financing for presidential candidates. However
America's reputation for justice, law, and equality has been tarnished by abuses to campaign finance
law that aid in electing the varying political faces that

Texas Constitutional Setting

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Kristin Oliver

More from Kristin Oliver (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Texas Constitutional Setting