•   
  •   
  •   

Politics A Modest Win for the Constitution

01:30  01 july  2020
01:30  01 july  2020 Source:   nationalreview.com

Kremlin chief Putin does not rule out renewed candidacy

 Kremlin chief Putin does not rule out renewed candidacy Kremlin chief Vladimir Putin is keeping a new candidacy open in four years if the greatest constitutional change in Russian history is confirmed in a referendum. © Photo: Alexei Nikolsky / Pool Sputnik Kremlin / AP / dpa Kremlin boss Vladimir Putin could imagine another term as president. "I haven't decided anything yet," said the 67-year-old in a film by the state television Rossija 1, which was to be broadcast on Sunday.

The Constitution of the United States of America is the supreme law of the United States. We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings

The Constitution of the United States established America’s national government and fundamental laws, and guaranteed certain basic rights for its citizens. "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the

Is the president the nation’s chief executive? That was the question that lay at the heart of Seila Law LLC. v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), the decision issued by the Supreme Court yesterday. In concluding that the director of the CFPB must serve at the president’s pleasure, the Court seemingly answered that, yes, the Constitution makes the president the chief executive. But by retaining several erroneous precedents, the Court actually concluded that the president is chief executive . . . except when the Court has previously opined otherwise.

A member of Congress holds a copy of the Constitution in Washington, D.C., June 20, 2017. © Kevin Lamarque/Reuters A member of Congress holds a copy of the Constitution in Washington, D.C., June 20, 2017.

The issue in the case concerned the structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, an agency charged with both creating and enforcing federal laws related to financial products such as mortgages and credit cards. In creating the agency, Congress aimed to make it truly independent, free of presidential and congressional oversight. The president could remove its director only for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance, a notoriously high standard that would preclude removal for such things as misguided prosecutorial policies. Moreover, by granting a permanent appropriation to the CFPB, Congress ensured that future legislators could not exert the leverage it has when it holds an agency’s purse strings. Imagine if police departments had guaranteed budgets and one can better see the drawbacks of inadequate legislative oversight.

Ministry of the Interior says presentation of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution from

 Ministry of the Interior says presentation of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution from Horst Seehofer actually wanted to present the report with the President of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution to journalists on Tuesday. This does not happen. The interior minister is under pressure because he has announced a complaint against a taz author. © Christoph Schmidt / picture alliance The Federal Ministry of the Interior temporarily canceled the presentation of the constitutional protection report 2019 on Monday evening.

State constitutions are subordinate to the U.S. Constitution . Philosophically, the Texas Constitution reflects a. distrust of politicians and political power. Which of the following is not a reason for the low level of voter turnout for constitutional amendments? Negative advertising in the media has had the

The constitution also indicates what provinces are a part of Canada and what the powers of those provinces are. For example, provinces have jurisdiction over education and the environment. Canada's Constitutional Documents (including the British North America Act). This is a bit detailed

The opinion was the product of Chief Justice John Roberts’s reverence for precedent. Roberts, writing for the Court, discussed why the removal restriction was unconstitutional. He properly concluded that the Constitution grants the president “all the executive power” and that this power includes authority to fire executive officers at will. He also denied that Congress had carte blanche to strip away the removal power. So far, so good.

But there were two pesky Supreme Court opinions that could have been read to sanction this congressional restriction on removal authority. The more recent case, Morrison v. Olson, is perhaps the worst separation-of-powers decision of the modern era. In Morrison, the Court concluded that Congress can, by creating independent counsels, impinge upon executive power as long as it does not prevent the president from carrying out his constitutional tasks. It did so despite the fact that the independent counsel at issue in the case had, in fact, hindered the president’s execution of his constitutional duties. No one who has studied the issue can escape the sense that independent prosecutors usurp governmental power that has always been executive.

Supreme Court Boosts School Vouchers in Religious Rights Ruling

  Supreme Court Boosts School Vouchers in Religious Rights Ruling A divided U.S. Supreme Court said states must include religious schools in programs that offer taxpayer subsidies for private education, in a ruling that could affect more than a dozen states and spur a new push for school vouchers. © Photographer: Stefani Reynolds/Getty Images North America WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 30: Television crews set up outside the U.S. Supreme Court on June 30, 2020 in Washington, DC. The court is expected to release a ruling later this morning determining whether President Trump can block the release of his financial records.

The Constitution is “owned” (so to speak) by the people, not by the government or any branch thereof. We the People are the stewards of the U.S The other purposes for adopting the Constitution , recited by the Preamble— to “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence

State Constitutions - Summary The State Constitutions took heed from history, the flaws in British laws and the aspirations of the Declaration of Independence. It is based on the set of laws and principles under which the country is governed but there is no single constitutional document.

The other, older case in the same vein, Humphrey’s Executor, reflected an attempt to limit the powers exercised by Franklin Roosevelt during the Great Depression. The case’s discussion of the agency involved, the Federal Trade Commission, was slipshod and bizarre. What was obviously an executive agency — it enforced a federal statute on private parties — was declared not to be executive, as if a judicial ipse dixit could turn an animal into a vegetable.

Rather than simply overturn these cases in Seila Law, Roberts chose to distinguish them. He considered the factors in these cases, lined them up against those at issue in Seila Law, and concluded that they were different. Not surprisingly, the dissent did the same comparison and argued that the two cases authorized Congress to impose the removal restriction.

But there was little sense in upholding these two previous cases. They were wrong when they were decided and, just as importantly, are inconsistent with the rationale the Court adopted in Seila Law. If what Roberts writes in Seila Law is true — and it is — he must really believe that the two earlier cases were dead wrong. So it’s puzzling that he chose to draw artful, debatable distinctions to evade overturning them.

landslide victory for Putin - constitutional change takes effect

 landslide victory for Putin - constitutional change takes effect Moscow. The controversial new Russian constitution has been adopted with more than three quarters of the vote. Kremlin chief Vladimir Putin can thus continue to rule stronger - possibly until 2036. But there is also criticism. © Mikhail Klimentyev Vladimir Putin, President of Russia, speaking on television in front of a war memorial (archive). After the adoption of the new constitution, Russian President Vladimir Putin can continue to use nuclear power and raw materials for years to come.

The Constitution of India was adopted by the elected Constituent Assembly on 26 November 1949 and came into effect on 26 January 1950. She accompanied Gandhi to London for the inconclusive second session of the Round Table Conference in 1931.

The " constitutional " part means that we have a constitution , which is pretty obvious, considering this site. It is the content of that constitution , and the values of that federation and/or republic that protects the rights of minorities. Note that a democracy, in the true sense of the word, does not protect

I suppose this is what courts sometimes do: Rather than overturn old cases, they labor to find fine, almost elusive distinctions to reach conclusions that seem incompatible with prior precedents. But a judge does not truly follow precedent if he draws upon factors that were seen as irrelevant at the time the precedent was issued.

Sometimes a precedent ought to be overturned, with haste. Everyone on the Court has voted to do this while on the federal bench. Why Roberts goes out of his way not to, from time to time, is a mystery. It isn’t as if his gun-shy tendencies earn him public praise; people rightfully sense that the Court too often seizes upon minor factors that mattered little in the previous cases. Everyone can see through the charade.

If he wins the presidency in November, Joe Biden should be able to usher in an executive administration that reflects his law-enforcement priorities, not those of President Trump. There is no reason for the ghosts of administrations past to stick around, thwarting the man or woman in charge of the executive branch. That is now true for the CFPB. But it should be no less true for the Securities and Exchange Commission or the Federal Communications Commission. We have one chief executive, and the Constitution does not sanction the creation of fiefdoms unaccountable to him within the federal government — or, for that matter, of a commission of mini–chief executives in black robes.

More on National Review

  • School Choice Defeats Anti-Catholic Bigotry 5–4 at the Supreme Court
  • Josh Hawley’s New Deal
  • John Roberts Hands a Victory to the Likes of Kermit Gosnell

Supreme Court ensures more educational opportunity for kids .
The Espinoza ruling is welcome news for families across the country — but especially in the 38 states with no-aid provisions.The Montana legislature created a tax-credit scholarship program in 2015 that would allow families to apply for scholarship funds and use them at any qualified private school. This initially included religious schools, which make up more than two-thirds of private schools in Montana. In order to incentivize donations to the scholarship fund, taxpayers would receive a modest tax credit of $150 per year for their donation.

—   Share news in the SOC. Networks
usr: 0
This is interesting!