scholarly journals Is “Constitutional Veneration” an Obstacle to Constitutional Amendment?

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Christopher T. Dawes ◽  
James R. Zink
Keyword(s):  
Research Design ◽  
Institutional Factors ◽  
Constitutional Amendment ◽  
Direct Link ◽  
The Us ◽  
Survey Experiments ◽  
Us Constitution

Abstract Some constitutional scholars suggest that the US Constitution stands as one of the oldest yet least changed national constitutions in part because Americans’ tendency to “revere” the Constitution has left them unwilling to consider significant changes to the document. Several recent studies support aspects of this claim, but no study establishes a direct link between individuals’ respect for the Constitution and their reluctance to amend it. To address this, we replicate and extend the research design of Zink and Dawes (2016) across two survey experiments. The key difference in our experiments is we include measures of respondents’ propensity to revere the Constitution, which in turn allows us to more directly test whether constitutional veneration translates into resistance to amendment. Our results build on Zink and Dawes’s findings and show that, in addition to institutional factors, citizens’ veneration of the Constitution can act as a psychological obstacle to constitutional amendment.

scholarly journals An American Notwithstanding Clause? Between Potestas and Potentia

Laws ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 72
Author(s):  
Boleslaw Z. Kabala ◽  
Rainey Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Political Activity ◽  
Constitutional Amendment ◽  
American People ◽  
Baruch Spinoza ◽  
Joint Declaration ◽  
Judicial Supremacy ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Constitution ◽  
Accepted Practice

Debates about judicial review and departmentalism have continued to rage, and in the wake of the last three Supreme Court appointments and current Presidential Commission on the Court, only look to intensify. Should the US adopt a notwithstanding or override provision, of the kind that exits in Canada and Israel? These countries take a departmentalist approach to allow the legislature to override the Court, “notwithstanding” its ruling. Although America is a presidential framework, a paradox emerges: evidence exists that its system already makes possible the equivalent of a notwithstanding clause. This consists of Congress and the President together “overruling” the Supreme Court. In another sense, however, this is not an accepted practice—large parts of the legal community hold that the US Constitution establishes judicial supremacy. To better understand this dynamic, we consider two kinds of power: formal and authorized (potestas) as well as direct and concrete (potentia). The contrast between the positions on both power and sovereignty of Thomas Hobbes (associated with potestas) and Baruch Spinoza (linked to potentia) helps clarify these issues in a contemporary context. It turns out that a robust departmentalist equivalent of the notwithstanding clause already exists in the US, as a matter of Hobbesian potestas but not of Spinozist potentia. Another term for the latter is pouvoir constituant. Spinoza’s perspective on political activity further clarifies the in-between nature of the American override capacity: the active or passive character of a multitude is not binary, but is a matter of degree. Without making an institutional recommendation, we note that Spinoza’s understanding of power also allows for dynamic interaction between potentia and potestas: formal authorization can contribute to the expression of direct power. It is, therefore, conceivable that additional codification of the existing American override capacity, either through a joint declaration of Congress and the Presidency or a Constitutional Amendment, can strengthen the effective sovereignty of the American people in relation to the courts.

scholarly journals An Assessment of Right to Fair Trial Under the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973: A Comparative Study of the US and Pakistan

2020 ◽  
Vol V (IV) ◽  
pp. 31-39
Author(s):  
Bakht Munir ◽  
Ali Nawaz Khan ◽  
Naveed Ahmed
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
19Th Century ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Equal Protection ◽  
Constitutional Amendment ◽  
New Methods ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Constitution ◽  
Speedy Trial ◽  
Made In

Right to fair trial is considered as the basic right affirmed by Islam and recognised by different international documents i.e., ICCPR, UDHR, etc. In Pakistan, the notion of fair trial has been incorporated through Article 10-A through 18th constitutional amendment. The two amendments were made in the US Constitution in 18th and 19th century i.e., 6th and 14th amendments which safeguards right to speedy trial, impartial jury, public trial and equal protection of law. The Investigation for Fair Trial Act, 2013, permits the use of new methods in collection of evidence and also bridles arbitrary powers from being used. However, being dissimilar to the essence of the Constitution, 21st Amendment was made to adopt Pakistan Army Act, 2015 in order to control the extremism. The key purpose of the article is to assess how far the efforts for the enforcement of right to fair trial in Pakistan are sufficient?

Scripturalizing and the Second Amendment

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosamond C. Rodman
Keyword(s):  
White Women ◽  
White Children ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Second Amendment ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Status ◽  
Us Constitution ◽  
Half Decade

Expanding beyond the text of the Bible, this chapter explores instead a piece of political scripture, namely the Second Amendment of the US Constitution. Over the last half-decade, the Second Amendment has come to enjoy the status of a kind of scripture-within-scripture. Vaulted to a much more prominent status than it had held in the first 150 years or so of its existence, and having undergone a remarkable shift in what most Americans think it means, the Second Amendment provides an opportunity to examine the linguistic, racial, and gendered modes by which these changes were effected, paying particular attention to the ways in which white children and white women were conscripted into the role of the masculine, frontier-defending US citizen.

scholarly journals Dirty tricks on the underground press

1981 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 47-50
Author(s):  
Geoffrey Rips
Keyword(s):  
Vietnam War ◽  
The United States ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Underground Press ◽  
General Terms ◽  
The Us ◽  
Psychedelic Drugs ◽  
Us Constitution ◽  
The Vietnam War ◽  
The 1960S

What was known in the United States as the ‘underground press’ – self-published newspapers of the youth counterculture sold at street corners and around campuses in American cities during the 1960s and early 70 s – was once a significant network estimated at over 400 publications. Their hallmark was opposition to US involvement in the Vietnam War, criticism of the authorities, of uncontrolled technology and big business, advocacy of sexual freedom and artistic experimentation and, frequently, the advocacy of marijuana, LSD and other psychedelic drugs. Few of these publications have survived the past ten years, and their disappearance has been variously attributed to the cooling of radical interest after the American withdrawal from Vietnam, as well as to the vague and shifting nature of the ‘hippie’ scene. Complaints by their publishers during the early and mid-seventies that printers refused their business, that office rents suddenly doubled, that advertising was cancelled, that papers were lost – these were seen as local accidents and were rarely reported by the established media. Claims of official or officially-sanctioned harassment were dismissed – even by fellow radicals – as paranoid. Recent research by Geoffrey Rips of the PEN American Center has revealed the extent and variety of official pressure exerted against alternative publications during the Vietnam War period. Using evidence from government hearings like the Church Committee, which reported in 1976, actual FBI documents released to American PEN under the Freedom of Information Act, and other sources, Mr Rips argues that such harassment contributed materially to the closure of certain publications and in general terms constituted a gross infringement on the protection afforded to dissenting opinion and to a free press under the US constitution. We publish edited extracts here from Geoffrey Rips' report which will be published in full by the PEN American Center and the City Lights Press.

Legal basis of «democracy»

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergey Polischuk
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Founding Fathers ◽  
Political Events ◽  
Capitol Hill ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Constitution ◽  
Election Results

The article examines the main political events that took place in the United States from the controversial election results to the tragic events on Capitol Hill for Trump supporters, which led to human casualties, finally untied the hands of the Democrats and allowed them to bury all the democratic values that America has taught the whole world since the adoption of the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights by the founding fathers of the state.

The US Constitution and monetary powers: an analysis of the 1787 constitutional convention and the constitutional transformation of the US monetary system

2006 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
FARLEY GRUBB
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Convention ◽  
Watershed Transformation ◽  
Founding Fathers ◽  
Legal Tender ◽  
Paper Money ◽  
Monetary System ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Constitution

The monetary powers embedded in the US Constitution were revolutionary and led to a watershed transformation in the nation's monetary structure. They included determining what monies could be legal tender, who could emit fiat paper money, and who could incorporate banks. How the debate at the 1787 constitutional convention over these powers evolved and led the founding fathers to the specific powers adopted is presented and deconstructed. Why they took this path rather than replicate the successful colonial system and why they codified such powers into supreme law rather than leaving them to legislative debate and enactment are addressed.

Where to limit the freedom of speech? Analysis in the context of the First Amendment to the US Constitution and the fighting words doctrine

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 239-256
Author(s):  
Karolina Palka
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
Free Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Socialist ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Constitution ◽  
Socialist Party Of America ◽  
The Right

This article is about the limits of the right to free speech. The first section provides a brief introduction to this topic, primarily in the context of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The second section describes the case of Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, which was fundamental to the topic of this paper because the United States Supreme Court created the so-called "fighting words" doctrine based on it. In the next two sections, two court cases are presented that perfectly demonstrate the limits of the right to free speech in the United States: Snyder v. Phelps and Village of Skokie v. National Socialist Party of America. The fifth part shows the right to freedom of speech in the context of Polish civil, criminal, and constitutional law, as well as acts of international law binding on Poland. The last part is a short summary.

Censuses in the USA and statistics of immigration from Poland – methodological-historical perspective

2021 ◽  
Vol 66 (6) ◽  
pp. 27-49
Author(s):  
Włodzimierz Okrasa
Keyword(s):  
Census Data ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Funds ◽  
The Us ◽  
Lower Chamber ◽  
The Usa ◽  
History Of ◽  
Us Constitution ◽  
American Society ◽  
Dynamic Population

Censuses of population and housing in the United States are of particular interest to experts in many disciplines – in addition to statisticians, also to demographers, political scientists, sociologists, historians, and even psychologists and anthropologists. This is so not only because of the long history of US censuses (the first census in the US was carried out in 1790) or methodological innovations, but due to immigration responsible for the dynamic population growth, and to the specific purpose of the census, which is ensuring the proportional (according to the numer of inhabitants) distribution of seats in the lower chamber of Congress and federal funds (apportionment), guaranteed by the US Constitution. The heterogeneity of the American society, both in the racial-ethnic and religious-cultural sense, in addition to the above considerations, raise questions about the purposes of those changes and directions for improvement in subsequent censuses. The aim of the article is to present the problems and challenges related to censuses in the USA. The paper focuses on methodological and operational solutions that can be implemented thanks to several improvements, including the progress in the fields of statistics and technology. The paper also discusses the issues of credibility of the census data, based on the example of immigration from Poland and the Polish diaspora in the USA.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document