Civil Rights
Movements, leaders, victories and the continuing fight for equality.
q2K BHP
Black History Portal
THE BHP WIRE —
HIDDEN TRUTHS
What's New!
Explore the people, places, events, achievements, struggles and stories that shaped our journey.
Movements, leaders, victories and the continuing fight for equality.
Innovation, patents, science, technology and world-changing contributions.
Pioneers, champions, Negro Leagues, records, activism and excellence.
Meet the people whose lives, choices and achievements shaped the journey.
Black towns, communities, institutions and places where history happened.
Moments that changed communities, movements, institutions and the nation.
In August 1908, a white mob attacked Springfield, Illinois’s Black community, destroying homes and businesses and lynching two Black men. National outrage over the violence helped spur the movement that created the NAACP the following year.
MORE →Reflects the personal views, recollections, and perspective of the author, Mike Davis.
This is a personal recollection on the Move fire on May 13, 1985
 | This article needs more citations. (September 2014) |
Constitutionality is the quality of being acceptable under a supreme law with regard to the status of a norm, a procedure, or an act's accordance with the constitution set forth by an applicable jurisdiction.[1] Laws, procedures, or acts that directly violate the constitution are considered unconstitutional. All others are considered constitutional unless deemed otherwise by a legitimate authority and through a legitimate mechanism.
An act or statute enacted as law either by a national legislature or by a subordinate-level legislature such as that of a state or province may be declared unconstitutional.[2]
However, governments do not only create laws but also enforce the laws set forth in the document defining the government (the constitution).
When the proper court determines that a legislative act or law conflicts with the constitution, it finds that law unconstitutional and declares it void in whole or in part.[3]
Depending on the type of legal system, a statute may be declared unconstitutional by any court or only by special constitutional courts with authority to rule on the validity of a statute.[4]
In some countries, the legislature may create any law for any purpose, and there is no provision for courts to declare a law unconstitutional. That can occur either because the country has no codified constitution that laws must conform to like in the United Kingdom and New Zealand or because the constitution is codified, but no court has the authority to strike down laws on the basis of it like in the Netherlands and Switzerland. There may be other remedies however, such as how Swiss voters can, by plebiscite, void federal legislation by petitioning for a direct vote of the citizenry as to whether the law should be upheld or not.
In many jurisdictions, the supreme court or constitutional court is the final legal arbiter that renders an opinion on whether a law or an action of a government official is constitutional. Constitutions define the powers of government, Thus, national constitutions typically apply only to government actions. Only governments can then violate the nation's constitution, but there are exceptions.
Unconstitutional actions include:
| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
Source: Wikipedia. Article content is retrieved live through the MediaWiki API.
Constitutionality is the quality of being acceptable under a supreme law with regard to the status of a norm, a procedure, or an act's accordance with the constitution set forth by an applicable jurisdiction. Laws, procedures, or acts that directly violate the constitution are considered unconstitutional. All others are considered constitutional unless deemed otherwise by a legitimate authority and through a legitimate mechanism.
The Guarantors' Panel on the Constitutionality of Rules (Italian: Collegio Garante della Costituzionalità delle Norme) is the highest court of San Marino in matters of constitutional law. The institution was established with Constitutional Revising Law no. 36 of 26 February 2002, which has amended Article 16 of the "Declaration on the Citizens' Rights and Fundamental Principles of San Marino Constitutional Order". The Guarantors' Panel on the Constitutionality of Rules is the youngest body of San Marino constitutional order. Constitutionality review was previously entrusted to the Great and General Council, but throughout the years this solution had presented several limits. Constitutional Law no. 67 of 27 May 2003 governs the responsibilities of this Panel, while Qualified Law no. 55 of 25 April 2003 disciplines its organisation, incompatibilities, operation, appeal forms and procedures and the effects of its decisions. The Panel is composed of three effective members (one performing the function of President) and three substitute members. All members are elected by a two-thirds majority of the Great and General Council's members from among university professors of legal subjects, magistrates and law graduates with at least twenty years of experience in the field of law. At least one third of the Panel's members are renewed every two years following the designation, by drawing lots, of two of its members, one effective and one substitute, from among those having served at least for four years during the first mandate. After the first mandate, which lasts 4 years, one third of the Panel's members are renewed every two years. The Guarantors' Panel appoints its President for a two-year term, on the basis of the rotating principle, from among its effective members. As already pointed out, the functions of the Guarantors' Panel are similar to those of a Constitutional Court and, more precisely, it shall: verify the conformity of laws, of regulations having force of law, as well as of customary rules having force of law, with the fundamental principles of the Declaration on the Citizens' Rights or mentioned in it, upon direct request of at least twenty members of the Great and General Council, of the Congress of State, of five Township Councils, of a number of citizens making up at least 1.5% of the electorate and, with reference to proceedings pending before the Republic's courts, upon request of judges or the parties involved; decide on the acceptability of referendums proposals; decide in case of conflicts between constitutional bodies; act as "Regency Syndicate".
The presumption of constitutionality is a legal principle in the constitutional law of some jurisdictions that the judiciary should presume statutes enacted by the legislature to be constitutional, unless the law is clearly unconstitutional or a fundamental right is implicated. The scope and effect of the presumption will depend on the particular approach taken in each jurisdiction.
In Canada, the term quasi-constitutional is used for laws which remain paramount even when subsequent statutes, which contradict them, are enacted by the same legislature. This is the reverse of the normal practice, under which newer laws trump any contradictory provisions in any older statute.
Before the 1921 destruction of Tulsa’s Greenwood District, Black residents had created a remarkable center of business and community life. The district included stores, professional offices, entertainment venues and homes owned by Black citizens. Understanding Greenwood means learning what was built—not only what was burned.
MORE →Shirley Chisholm, elected in 1968.
