Public Holidays and the Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 536-548
Author(s):  
Richard W. Garnett ◽  
Jackson C. Blais
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Establishment Clause ◽  
Public Display ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Public Holidays ◽  
Official Recognition ◽  
State Separation

A peculiar feature of the celebration of Christmas in the United States is that its observance and its symbols became and continue to be the subjects of First Amendment litigation regarding the Establishment Clause. It has been frequently claimed, and courts have sometimes agreed, that the public display of Christmas decorations and symbols, and the official recognition of Christmas as a legal holiday, are unconstitutional ‘establishments’ of religion. After the Supreme Court’s created the Lemon test to consider Establishment Clause claims, courts’ rulings under the test have been inconsistent and unpredictable, and the subject of widespread academic and popular criticism. There are reasons to believe, however, that the current Supreme Court is moving away from a strict form of ‘Church–State separation’ and towards a greater appreciation for tradition, history, and practice.

scholarly journals The Study’s Origins and Methodology

2021 ◽  
pp. 9-16
Author(s):  
Daniela Bandelli
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Women's Movement ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
The United States ◽  
Theoretical Framework ◽  
International Debate ◽  
The Public ◽  
Key Concepts ◽  
The Subject ◽  
United States Mexico

AbstractThis chapter discusses the origin, spirit, objectives and methodology of this study on the surrogacy international debate. The aim of this study is to explain the politics of signification on surrogacy carried out especially by the women’s movement, verifying how it is contributing to the public discourse and policies on the subject, how it is being organized, as well as dividing, and how the proposed instances fit into global discourses and are recontextualized on the basis of social specificities. These aims are pursued through three case studies in the United States, Mexico and Italy. The key concepts of the theoretical framework of the research will also be described in this chapter, such as: the women’s movement, diagnostic and prognostic frames.

scholarly journals Elonis v. United States: The Doctrine of True Threats: Protecting Our Ever-Shrinking First Amendment Rights in the New Era of Communication

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-223
Author(s):  
Mary Margaret Roark
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
Free Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
The United States ◽  
New Era ◽  
The Public ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The U.S

The First Amendment protects one of our most precious rights as citizens of the United States—the freedom of speech. Such protection has withstood the test of time, even safeguarding speech that much of the population would find distasteful. There is one form of speech which cannot be protected: the true threat. However, the definition of what constitutes a "true threat" has expanded since its inception. In the new era of communication—where most users post first and edit later—the First Amendment protection we once possessed has been eroded as more and more speech is considered proscribable as a "true threat." In order to adequately protect both the public at large and our individual right to free speech, courts should analyze a speaker’s subjective intent before labeling speech a "true threat." Though many courts have adopted an objective, reasonable listener test, the U.S. Supreme Court now has the opportunity, in deciding Elonis v. United States, to take a monumental step in protecting the First Amendment right to free speech. By holding that the speaker’s subjective intent to threaten is necessary for a true threat conviction, the Court will restore the broad protection afforded by the First Amendment and repair years of erosion caused by an objective approach.

scholarly journals The First Amendment and the End of the World

2007 ◽  
Vol 68 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stewart Harris
Keyword(s):  
First Amendment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Nuclear Nonproliferation ◽  
Weapons Of Mass Destruction ◽  
Biological Weapons ◽  
The Public ◽  
Chemical And Biological Weapons ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Mere Possession ◽  
Types Of Information

This paper deals with a serious question that is largely unaddressed by the U.S. or international legal systems: how should society deal with inherently, catastrophically dangerous information—information that, in the wrong hands, could lead to the destruction of a city, a continent, or, conceivably, the entire planet? Such information includes, but is not limited to, blueprints for nuclear weapons, as well as specific formulae for chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction. The paper is not a critique of the existing statutes and regulations that various governments use to keep their secrets secret. Rather, it is a discussion of what to do when some such secrets are inevitably disclosed, or, more generally, how to deal with catastrophically dangerous information that is generated outside of governmental control. Addressing these issues is primarily a matter of policy, but policy with significant constitutional dimensions. Perhaps the most fundamental of thosedimensions is the question of whether a governmental restriction on receipt, dissemination, and even mere possession of information can be reconciled with the speech and press clauses of the First Amendment. Although existing authorities do not directly address the subject, what little authority there is suggests that reasonable restrictions upon the possession and dissemination of catastrophically dangerous information—even when that information is already within the public domain—can be implemented in a way that is consistent with the First Amendment. Given the growing urgency of the subject and the need for a comprehensive approach, I advocate a statutory solution in the United States that defines and limits access to catastrophically dangerous information, but which also limits governmental seizures and restrictions to only the most dangerous types of information, and which provides for a pre-seizure warrant requirement and expedited post-seizure judicial review. Given the global dimensions of the problem, I also advocate a corresponding international regime patterned upon the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty of 1968.

Nurses in national defense

1964 ◽  
Vol 4 (40) ◽  
pp. 339-347
Author(s):  
Ann Magnussen
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Nursing Profession ◽  
National Defense ◽  
The Public ◽  
The World ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Modern Warfare

The subject I have been asked to discuss is one which has been of great concern to the nursing profession in the United States for many years, but this interest has been accentuated by our recognition of the vulnerability of every part of the world in modern warfare. The nurse has traditionally been the personification of those who care for the sick, and the helpless. Her very presence gives the patients a feeling of security and comfort. The public, the physicians, and the patients expect nurses to have an important role in national defense. Therefore, nurses must be prepared and willing to carry out their responsibilities effectively.Before telling you what we are planning to do to prepare nurses to function adequately in national defense, it will be necessary to review the milieu in which we work as each country has its own framework in which activities are carried out and, therefore, the pattern of action may not be the same for every country. Further, I recognize that there are countries represented here that have had much more experience with the problems inherent in planning for national defense than we have in our country.

The Ownership of the U.S. Embassy Site in Jerusalem

2000 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 80-101
Author(s):  
Walid Khalidi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
Private Property ◽  
The United States ◽  
Public Records ◽  
The Public ◽  
Tel Aviv ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Palestinian Refugee ◽  
The U.S

One of the most difficult issues of the final status negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians is Jerusalem. The complexity of this issue has been compounded by U.S. actions to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and by allegations that the prospective site of the embassy is Palestinian refugee property confiscated by Israel since 1948. Evidence of Palestinian ownership of the 7.7-acre site-the subject of this report-was gathered by a group of Palestinians from the records of the United Nations Conciliation Committee on Palestine (UNCCP) in New York, the Public Records Office (PRO) in London, the U.S. State Department (DOS), the Jerusalem Municipality, the Israeli Land Registry Records (Tapu), the Israeli Ministry of justice, and heirs of the original owners. The research extended over a six-year period and involved some forty individuals. Although hampered by the inaccessibility of the site to surveyors and by Israel's rezoning and reparcellation of the land in question, the evidence yielded by this research shows that at least 70 percent of the site is refugee private property, of which more than a third is Islamic waqf (trust). On 15 May 1948, the last day of the Mandate, the site was owned by seventy-six Palestinians. On 28 October 1999, the American Committee on Jerusalem (ACJ) addressed a letter to Secretary of State Madeleine Albright outlining the results of this research and requesting a meeting to share the findings with the DOS. It was only on 28 December that the DOS replied to the effect that any data that the group had should be communicated to the DOS "to be kept on file." Given the grave implications of the embassy issue for the peace process and the credibility of the United States, the ACJ felt as a result of the correspondence that it had no alternative but to go public.

Organized Crime

1969 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 333-340
Author(s):  
Ralph Salerno
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Organized Crime ◽  
Justice System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Executive Leaders ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Subject

One of the few statements that can be made with complete assurance about organized crime is that doing something about it is not easy. Sizable segments of the public who are aware of it and indeed have been victimized by it won't even talk about the subject, let alone "get involved" as complainants or witnesses. Executive leaders in government, rarely commanding the re sources required to deal with organized crime, have, until re cently, ignored the subject. It comes as no surprise, then, that the criminal justice system in the United States has not responded to the record.

What is Truth? Setting the Bounds of Justiciability in Religiously-Inflected Fact Disputes

2010 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-139
Author(s):  
Caleb E. Mason
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
Religious Belief ◽  
The United States ◽  
Philosophical Debate ◽  
Free Exercise ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Constitutional Constraints ◽  
Private Actors

What does it mean for a religious belief to be true? This question has been the subject of a rich theological and philosophical debate stretching back thousands of years. But times change, and the answers appropriate for one epoch will cease to fit new ones. As long as people continue to care about their religions and their beliefs, the question must be continually posed and competing answers evaluated.In the United States, facially theological questions quickly take on constitutional dimensions, thanks to the religion clauses of the First Amendment. Government interaction with religion is inevitable, and ongoing public debate about the proper scope and limits of that interaction is a familiar and necessary component of our constitutional order. The meaning of “free exercise of religion” and its infringement is the continuously evolving product of litigation, legislation, and regulation pursued by state and private actors against a backdrop of assumed—and often contested—constitutional constraints and constitutional ideals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document