Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

States need a simple guarantee of rights

Article Abstract:

State sovereignty under the 10th Amendment needs to be reaffirmed by the US Congress instead of passing laws to limit federal intrusions such as the unfunded mandate law. The US Supreme Court undercut the Amendment in Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority by limiting states' recourse to the political process. However, the Amendment was slightly reestablished in New York v. United States because the Court ruled that Congress could not dictate how states govern. Allowing states to control their programs allowing for specific situations would be the best solution to federalism.

Author: Wilson, Jerome L.
Publisher: ALM Media, Inc.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1995
Public Administration, State Government, Sovereignty

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


N.R.A. should not rejoice: Brady Act lives on

Article Abstract:

The National Rifle Assn should moderate its response to the US Supreme Court's Printz v. US ruling, that the mandatory background check of handgun purchasers in the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 is unconstitutional. The court's decision left the act largely intact, with the waiting period still in force. The background check, which becomes voluntary, will probably still be performed by most police forces because law enforcement strongly supports the act. If police choose to forego the check, the waiting period will run its full length.

Author: Henigan, Dennis A.
Publisher: ALM Media, Inc.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1997
United States, Public relations, Gun control, National Rifle Association

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


In DWI cases, Texas disregards constitution

Article Abstract:

Political pressures have led Texas to ride roughshod over constitutional rights when prosecuting drunk driving cases. Both the state and federal constitutions contain a protection against self-incrimination, but Texas law requires defendants to incriminate themselves in the area of drunk driving. The option of the 'implied consent' law is really no option at all. Public intolerance of drunk driving has been so strident that those opposed to such intrusive laws have been accused of opposing the public good.

Author: Hoover, Christopher N.
Publisher: ALM Media, Inc.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1997
Cases, Texas, Drunk driving, Driving while intoxicated, Self-incrimination, Self incrimination

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Interpretation and construction, Laws, regulations and rules, Federalism, Constitutional law, Constitutional interpretation
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: The role of a bill of rights. Originalism and interpretive conventions. The true wisdom of the Bill of Rights
  • Abstracts: Firms and law students both should reassess their summer strategies. Beating the odds with first-years; student hiring
  • Abstracts: Seeking a preliminary injunction. Copyright and the franchise. Defeating requests for preliminary injunctive relief in franchise termination cases
  • Abstracts: Climate change: The final countdown. The significance of the proposed changes to the waste framework directive
  • Abstracts: Disproportionate investment of plan assets in residential mortgages not imprudent. Mortgage loans from bank under program established by pension trustees not subject to s. 72(p)
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.