Slideshow prepared for a lecture on Civil Liberties for PS 101 American Government at the University of Kentucky, Fall 2007. Dr. Christopher S. Rice, Lecturer.
This is the vital assignment for IPE239 Comparative Political Systems, IPED Prpgram, Rangsit University. The course part aims at providing an introduction to the field of comparative politics. Various theoretical perspectives and basic concepts within the field are taken up. The political systems of a number of countries - in relation to formal political institutions and informal aspects of the political order - are presented, discussed and compared. Issues of identity as well as the position of nation states in a global context are also dealt with. The course part includes an introduction to comparative method and sources of knowledge about political systems.
Slideshow prepared for a lecture on Civil Liberties for PS 101 American Government at the University of Kentucky, Fall 2007. Dr. Christopher S. Rice, Lecturer.
This is the vital assignment for IPE239 Comparative Political Systems, IPED Prpgram, Rangsit University. The course part aims at providing an introduction to the field of comparative politics. Various theoretical perspectives and basic concepts within the field are taken up. The political systems of a number of countries - in relation to formal political institutions and informal aspects of the political order - are presented, discussed and compared. Issues of identity as well as the position of nation states in a global context are also dealt with. The course part includes an introduction to comparative method and sources of knowledge about political systems.
I put together this slide set for my classmates at USC in the International Public Policy and Management Program (IPPAM) in the Price School of Public Policy. As most are foreign nationals, they wanted to learn more about our Presidential elections. It was a great refresher for myself as well. Feel free to enjoy and share.
this presentation gives the basic idea about the key features about the constitution of The United States of America. it also talks about the Father's of The Constitution Making. it provides basic facts about the US constitution - date it was made, etc.
I put together this slide set for my classmates at USC in the International Public Policy and Management Program (IPPAM) in the Price School of Public Policy. As most are foreign nationals, they wanted to learn more about our Presidential elections. It was a great refresher for myself as well. Feel free to enjoy and share.
this presentation gives the basic idea about the key features about the constitution of The United States of America. it also talks about the Father's of The Constitution Making. it provides basic facts about the US constitution - date it was made, etc.
Rodriguez 1
Diego Rodriguez
Winston Padgett
Government 2305, Sect. 049
Monday, April 14, 2014
Same Sex Marriage: Constitutional and Cultural Considerations Outline
Same sex marriage - is a highly controversial topic in the United States. It impacts our culture and, in many regards to religious beliefs
I. Why and how the U.S. Supreme Court has issued two important rulings that opened up room in constitutional jurisprudence for consideration of gay rights.
A. Yet the vast majority of other states have adopted statutes or constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage. Do they right to revolt against government tyranny and fight for their rights
B. What states approve of same sex marriage? Which states deny same sex marriage? How has this happen?
II. In this Article, I argue that an individual who marries in her state of domicile and then migrates to a mini-defense of marriage act state has a significant liberty interest under the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause in the ongoing existence of her marriage.
A. Section 1 ARTICLE IV “Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records, and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.”
B. Courts generally agreed right applies to individuals
C. Government permitted to limit some rights of marriage by same sex.
D. Questions today center around: What bans our enforced presently on same sex marriage? Should it be mandatory for gays that want marriage neutral principle grounded in core Due Process Clause values: protection of reasonable expectations and of marital and family privacy, respect for established legal and social practices, and rejection of the idea that a state can sever a legal family relationship merely by operation of law?
III. Court cases outcome for gay marriages
A. The article cites a survey on the constitutional amendment banning gay marriage in the U.S. which found that 50% of the American people are in favor of the amendment banning same-sex marriages while 47% strongly opposed.
B. This survey was conducted by Gallup Poll Ltd. conducted on May 8-11, 2006. Findings also revealed that 66% of the Republicans favor the constitutional amendment defining marriage as a heterosexual institution while 55% of the Democrats opposed the amendment.
C. United States v. Windsor, a narrow majority ruled that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, which comprehensively defined "marriage" and "spouse" in federal law to exclude same-sex partners, was unconstitutional.
D. In Hollingsworth v. Perry, the Court let stand a trial-court ruling invalidating California's Proposition 8, which outlawed same-sex marriage. Will Fourteenth Amendment still not incorporated to protect gay marriage
IV. There have been and there will continue to be disagreements about the merits of same-sex marriage. But disagree ...
The American Experiment to "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity" fleshing out through 14th Amendment, historical context, privileges and immunities clause, citizenship clause, equal protection clause, and due process clause. Illustrated through Gore v. Bush.
HHP 4600 Law and Public HealthModule 3 Power Point questions on SusanaFurman449
HHP 4600 Law and Public Health
Module 3 Power Point questions on Privacy
1. Where in the U.S. Constitution is the explicit provision recognizing the right to privacy?
2. How has the Supreme Court recognized the right to privacy?
3. Roe v Wade recognizes the privacy of women’s right to choose to reproduce or not. How does the decision to abort a fetus legally avoid clashing with the right to life of a child? Does Roe v Wade require every state to permit abortions? Why is it more difficult to have an abortion in some states than others?
4. What fundamental right is common in cases involving abortion, guardianship, right to refuse treatment, and sex between consenting adults?
5. What did the courts decide in Bowers v Hardwick? Was a fundamental right actually involved? Did the opinion of Justice White recognize that fundamental right? How was this different from Roe?
6. Karen Quinlan
1. What was decided in the case of Karen Quinlan?
2. What fundamental right do Quinlan and Cruzan have in common with abortion and contraceptive cases?
3. What prevalent practice became almost standard procedure by the public after the Quinlan and Cruzan decisions?
7. What did the court rule in
1. Bouvia?
2. Cruzan?
8. Has the Supreme Court decided we have a right to refuse treatment even if it leads to one’s death?
9. Has the Supreme Court decided we have a right to determine the timing and manner of our death, i.e. commit suicide?
Teitelbaum and Wilensky Chapter 6 Individual Rights in Health Care
1. Does having a license to practice medicine legally obligate you to provide healthcare to those who need it?
2. What is meant by the no duty principle?
3. Does the Constitution confer to Americans the right to education and health?
4. Did the passage of the Affordable Care Act of 2010 alter Americans right to health care?
5. How might the idea of having a free market health care system and a negative view of government be a barrier to single payer universal healthcare?
6. To what does EMTALA entitle a person?
7. What does the Canterbury case demonstrate?
8. How might Jacobson v Massachusetts be a legal precedent today in resolving cases where some people contest states or cities require wearing protective masks or social distancing or closing some businesses during a pandemic?
9. Why is it important to recognize the courts’ interpretation of the Tenth Amendment or police powers as empowering, but not obligating government to act?
10. If one believes the federal government has not done enough to protect citizens during a Pandemic, could one successfully sue to make the government take better care of its citizens?
11. What is meant by a negative constitution?
12. What do the cases of DeShaney and Town of Castle Rock cases demonstrate?
Updated 7/9/20
Government Power and Privacy
Module 3
PrivacyMaking individual decisions without government interferenceTorts or violations of civil liberties, but privacy not explicit in U.S. Cons ...
Protecting Defendants
UAB PSC 381 Bill of Rights
Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (1952)
Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966)
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965)
Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967)
Bowers v. Hardick
Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003)
Acetabularia Information For Class 9 .docxvaibhavrinwa19
Acetabularia acetabulum is a single-celled green alga that in its vegetative state is morphologically differentiated into a basal rhizoid and an axially elongated stalk, which bears whorls of branching hairs. The single diploid nucleus resides in the rhizoid.
Biological screening of herbal drugs: Introduction and Need for
Phyto-Pharmacological Screening, New Strategies for evaluating
Natural Products, In vitro evaluation techniques for Antioxidants, Antimicrobial and Anticancer drugs. In vivo evaluation techniques
for Anti-inflammatory, Antiulcer, Anticancer, Wound healing, Antidiabetic, Hepatoprotective, Cardio protective, Diuretics and
Antifertility, Toxicity studies as per OECD guidelines
Francesca Gottschalk - How can education support child empowerment.pptxEduSkills OECD
Francesca Gottschalk from the OECD’s Centre for Educational Research and Innovation presents at the Ask an Expert Webinar: How can education support child empowerment?
A Strategic Approach: GenAI in EducationPeter Windle
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies such as Generative AI, Image Generators and Large Language Models have had a dramatic impact on teaching, learning and assessment over the past 18 months. The most immediate threat AI posed was to Academic Integrity with Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) focusing their efforts on combating the use of GenAI in assessment. Guidelines were developed for staff and students, policies put in place too. Innovative educators have forged paths in the use of Generative AI for teaching, learning and assessments leading to pockets of transformation springing up across HEIs, often with little or no top-down guidance, support or direction.
This Gasta posits a strategic approach to integrating AI into HEIs to prepare staff, students and the curriculum for an evolving world and workplace. We will highlight the advantages of working with these technologies beyond the realm of teaching, learning and assessment by considering prompt engineering skills, industry impact, curriculum changes, and the need for staff upskilling. In contrast, not engaging strategically with Generative AI poses risks, including falling behind peers, missed opportunities and failing to ensure our graduates remain employable. The rapid evolution of AI technologies necessitates a proactive and strategic approach if we are to remain relevant.
Palestine last event orientationfvgnh .pptxRaedMohamed3
An EFL lesson about the current events in Palestine. It is intended to be for intermediate students who wish to increase their listening skills through a short lesson in power point.
June 3, 2024 Anti-Semitism Letter Sent to MIT President Kornbluth and MIT Cor...Levi Shapiro
Letter from the Congress of the United States regarding Anti-Semitism sent June 3rd to MIT President Sally Kornbluth, MIT Corp Chair, Mark Gorenberg
Dear Dr. Kornbluth and Mr. Gorenberg,
The US House of Representatives is deeply concerned by ongoing and pervasive acts of antisemitic
harassment and intimidation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Failing to act decisively to ensure a safe learning environment for all students would be a grave dereliction of your responsibilities as President of MIT and Chair of the MIT Corporation.
This Congress will not stand idly by and allow an environment hostile to Jewish students to persist. The House believes that your institution is in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and the inability or
unwillingness to rectify this violation through action requires accountability.
Postsecondary education is a unique opportunity for students to learn and have their ideas and beliefs challenged. However, universities receiving hundreds of millions of federal funds annually have denied
students that opportunity and have been hijacked to become venues for the promotion of terrorism, antisemitic harassment and intimidation, unlawful encampments, and in some cases, assaults and riots.
The House of Representatives will not countenance the use of federal funds to indoctrinate students into hateful, antisemitic, anti-American supporters of terrorism. Investigations into campus antisemitism by the Committee on Education and the Workforce and the Committee on Ways and Means have been expanded into a Congress-wide probe across all relevant jurisdictions to address this national crisis. The undersigned Committees will conduct oversight into the use of federal funds at MIT and its learning environment under authorities granted to each Committee.
• The Committee on Education and the Workforce has been investigating your institution since December 7, 2023. The Committee has broad jurisdiction over postsecondary education, including its compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, campus safety concerns over disruptions to the learning environment, and the awarding of federal student aid under the Higher Education Act.
• The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is investigating the sources of funding and other support flowing to groups espousing pro-Hamas propaganda and engaged in antisemitic harassment and intimidation of students. The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is the principal oversight committee of the US House of Representatives and has broad authority to investigate “any matter” at “any time” under House Rule X.
• The Committee on Ways and Means has been investigating several universities since November 15, 2023, when the Committee held a hearing entitled From Ivory Towers to Dark Corners: Investigating the Nexus Between Antisemitism, Tax-Exempt Universities, and Terror Financing. The Committee followed the hearing with letters to those institutions on January 10, 202
Model Attribute Check Company Auto PropertyCeline George
In Odoo, the multi-company feature allows you to manage multiple companies within a single Odoo database instance. Each company can have its own configurations while still sharing common resources such as products, customers, and suppliers.
Operation “Blue Star” is the only event in the history of Independent India where the state went into war with its own people. Even after about 40 years it is not clear if it was culmination of states anger over people of the region, a political game of power or start of dictatorial chapter in the democratic setup.
The people of Punjab felt alienated from main stream due to denial of their just demands during a long democratic struggle since independence. As it happen all over the word, it led to militant struggle with great loss of lives of military, police and civilian personnel. Killing of Indira Gandhi and massacre of innocent Sikhs in Delhi and other India cities was also associated with this movement.
4. The Judicial Branch
Constitutional Role
Power of Judicial Review
Appointments
Political Significance
Protection of Citizen’s Rights
Relationship with Other
Branches
5. Supreme Court & The Constitution
Judicial Branch is Article Three
Section 1 sets the
Supreme Court out as
the only Judicial Power
No provision for number
of Supreme Court justicesNo mention of Judicial
Activism
Congress can ‘ordain and
establish’ new courts
Judges shall hold their
office for life in ‘good
behaviour’
6. Structure of Federal Courts
Supreme Court sits at the
top of the Federal Court
system
Court rejects 96% of the
Cases brought to it
Lower courts hear
majority of cases
United States Supreme Court
US Court of Appeals
US Court of Appeals
1 Court – 9 Justices
1 in each of 11 circuits
1 in DC
1 Federal Circuit
1 in each 94 districts
7. Membership of the Supreme Court
8 Associate Justices
1 Chief Justice
All have an ideological stance
Number is set by Congress
FDR threatened to ‘pack the court’ when they
continually struck down New Deal legislation
Life tenure in good behaviour
8. Justice Date Appointed Sitting President Ideological Balance
Chief Justice
John Roberts
2005 George W Bush (R) Right Leaning
Associate Justices
Antonin Scalia 1986 Ronald Reagan (R) Right Leaning
Anthony Kennedy 1988 Ronald Reagan (R) Swing Vote
Clarence Thomas 1991 George H W Bush (R) Right Leaning
Ruth Bader Ginsburg 1993 William J Clinton (D) Left Leaning
Stephen Breyer 1994 William J Clinton (D) Left Leaning
Samuel Alito 2005 George W Bush (R) Right Leaning
Sonia Sotomayor 2009 Barack H Obama (D) Left Leaning
Elena Kagan 2010 Barack H Obama (D) Left Leaning
Membership of the Supreme Court
9. The Roberts Court
John Roberts
Antonin Scalia Anthony
Kennedy
Clarence
Thomas
Ruth Bader
Ginsburg
Stephen
Breyer
Samuel Alito Sonia
Sotomayor
Elena Kagan
10. Left Right
The Ideology of the Roberts Court
John Roberts
Antonin Scalia
Anthony
Kennedy
Clarence
Thomas
Ruth Bader
Ginsburg
Stephen
Breyer
Samuel Alito
Sonia
Sotomayor Elena Kagan
SWING VOTE
11. Judicial Philosophy
President’s often want to appoint Justices that
fit their own ideological image
Reagan: Bork, Scalia
Obama: Sotomayor, Kagan
Justices are often seen as ‘conservatives’ or
‘liberals’
There are more classifications
12. Constructionist
Strict Constructionist
Interprets the Constitution in a literal or ‘strict’ way, look at
the original intent of the Founding Fathers. Favour States
rights over Federal Government. Tend to be labelled as
‘conservatives’
Loose Constructionist
Interprets the Constitution in a loose way, in which they
‘read between the lines’. They look at the context of the
issue and the constitution. Favour federal government power
over that of states power and rights. Tend be labelled as
‘liberals’
13. Activism and Restraint
Judicial Activism
Justices should use their position to promote desirable social
ends. Activist courts have a large docket
Judicial Restraint
Justices should not ‘legislate’ from the bench, leaving this to
the legislature and executive. Greater stress should be
placed upon the precedent set by previous courts.
Restrained courts have a smaller docket
14. Appointments Process
Vacancy
Occurs
Search is
Instigated
FBI
Background
Checks
Senate
hearings and
confirmation
Death, Retirement or Impeachment
Advice sought from:
• Advisors
• Congress
• Professional Bodies
Nominees can come
from:
• Lower Courts
• Executive Branch
Legislative Branch
• Academia
FBI Checks and
interview with the
President. ABA gives
an informal rating
Clarence Thomas is
the last nominee to
receive lower than
perfect
SJC holds hearings for
the candidate
Sometimes candidates
withdraw if hearing is
bad
Vote on the floor. If
committee rules
against, Senate
typically will
15. Notable Appointments
Earl Warren
Appointed by
Eisenhower who
said it was the
biggest god dam
mistake of his life
Robert Bork
Reagan’s
controversial
nomination, the
subject of a
negative ad
campaign. Failed
to confirm
David Souter
Appointed by
George H W Bush
he has turned out
to be one of the
most liberal
members of the
Court
16. Why is this important?
Presidents seek to leave a
legacy in the court
One of their ideological
persuasion
The Court will outlive the
Presidency
Examples:
Reagan & George H W Bush
placed right leaning judges on
the Court – Bush v Gore 2000?
17. Judicial Review
No constitutional basis for this power
Found in Marbury v Madison 1803
Allowed the Court to rule:
• Acts of Congress
• Executive Actions
• State Law
UNCOSTITUTIONAL
18. The Courts you Need to Know
Year Court Year Court Year Court Year Court
1953
Warren
Court
1968
Warren
Court
1983
Burger
Court
1998
Rehnquist
Court
1954 1969 1984 1999
1955 1970
Burger
Court
1985 2000
1956 1971 1986
Rehnquist
Court
2001
1957 1972 1987 2002
1958 1973 1988 2003
1959 1974 1989 2004
1960 1975 1990 2005
Roberts
Court
1961 1976 1991 2006
1962 1977 1992 2007
1963 1978 1993 2008
1964 1979 1994 2009
1965 1980 1995 2010
1966 1981 1996 2011
1967 1982 1997 2012
19. Plessy v Ferguson 1856
Upheld segregation as
constitutional with the
reference to separate but
equal
Arose from the Louisiana
Separate Car Act for Rail
carriages
20. Brown v Board of Education 1953
This case overturns Plessy v Ferguson
1896
Established that separate was
inherently unequal in the provision
of facilities
Paved the way for integration
Ruled on through the Equal
Protection Clause of the 14th
Amendment
WARREN
21. Mapp v Ohio 1961
Ruled that evidence obtained in the violation of
the Fourth Amendment cannot be used in court
Arose from a dispute in Ohio which police didn’t
have a warrant and found large amounts of
pornography
WARREN
22. Engel v Vitale 1962
Ruled that it is unconstitutional
for school prayers in public
schools
This violates the First
Amendment
This was the basis for more cases
such as Wallace v Jaffree which
banned meditation in Alabama
WARREN
23. Gideon v Wainwright 1963
Under the Sixth Amendment
right to counsel is a
fundamental right
States must provide defence
counsel should the defendant
be unable to afford it
WARREN
24. Griswold v Connecticut 1965
Protected the right to Privacy
Connecticut law prohibited the
use of contraception
Supreme court ruled that it
violated the right to marital
privacy
Does the constitution provide for a
right to privacy specifically?
WARREN
25. Miranda v Arizona 1966
Ruled that the accused must
be read their legal rights prior
to questioning by the police
Basis is the fifth amendment
which protects against Self
Incrimination
WARREN
26. Roe v Wade 1973
Ruled that abortion was legal
in the first trimester
Found on the right to Privacy
under the due process clause
of the 14th Amendment
Texas law made it illegal to
assist a woman to get an
abortion
Is this legislating from the Bench?
BURGER
27. United States v Nixon 1974
Ruled that no person not even
the President is completely
above the law
Also ruled that the President
cannot use executive privilege
as an excuse to withhold
evidence in criminal trials
Started the ball rolling on Nixon
Impeachment
BURGER
28. Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Rules on abortion in
Pennsylvania were challenged
The court upheld the right to
an abortion but ruled that 1
out of 5 restrictions was
unconstitutional
Pennsylvania State made patients go through many
‘hoops’ before an abortion
REHNQUIST
29. Clinton v City of New York 1998
Ruled that the Line Item Veto
from the Line Item Veto Act of
1996 was unconstitutional as it
gave the President power to
amend legislation duly passed
by Congress
43 States give Governors
the power of Line Item Veto
Line Item Bill appeared in the
House in Feb 2012
REHNQUIST
30. George W Bush v Albert Gore 2000
Votes in Florida were close
Supreme Court ruled that
manually recounting a precinct
was wrong and the entire state
must be recounted
Proper recounting by deadline
of Dec 12 would be
unconstitutional
Decision handed down on Dec 11
REHNQUIST
31. Gonzales v Carhart 2007
Court upheld the Partial-Birth
Abortion Ban of 2003
It did not impose a burden on
the ability to have an abortion
as presented under Roe V
Wade and Planned Parenthood
v Casey
Shown as a turning in the
conservatism of the Roberts Court
ROBERTS
32. National Federation of Independent
Business v Sebelius 2012
Court upheld Affordable Care
Act requiring Americans to
purchase Health Insurance by
2014
Roberts ruled that a mandate
to buy insurance was an
exercise of Congress’ power to
collect taxes
ROBERTS
33. Case Visualisation
Year Case Year Case Year Case Year Case
1953 Brown v BoE 1968 1983 1998 Clinton v NY
1954 1969 1984 1999
1955 1970 1985 2000 Bush V Gore
1956 1971 1986 2001
1957 1972 1987 2002
1958 1973 Roe v Wade 1988 2003
1959 1974 US v Nixon 1989 2004
1960 1975 1990 2005
1961 Mapp v Ohio 1976 1991 2006
1962 Engel v Vitale 1977 1992 PP v Casey 2007 Gonzales v Car
1963 Gideon v Wain 1978 1993 2008
1964 1979 1994 2009
1965 Griswold v CT 1980 1995 2010
1966 Miranda v AZ 1981 1996 2011
1967 1982 1997 2012 NFIB v Sebelius
34. Hollingsworth v Perry 2013
California’s Prop 8 Case:
CSC ruled Same Sex Marriage
legal in 2008
Prop 8 Banned them
Opponents are seeking a court
ordered expansion of
traditional marriage Case is on-going – May appear
before the Court
ROBERTS
35. Judicial Synoptic Links
UK Judiciary are far less partisan and far less powerful
Appointments go through Judicial Appointments
Commission rather than Senate or Parliamentary
Hearings
Parliamentary Sovereignty undermines UKs judicial
power
Can’t rule on constitutionality but only make a
declaration of incompatibility
Judges must retire at aged 70
36. Exam success is
not a lottery!
Know your
terms
Know the
Articles
Know the
Examples