Does anyone know anything about the North dakota state constitution?
352472
Below is a webpage that I think will help your.  :)
26995
5 main principles are:\nPopular Sovereignty \nLimited Government \nFederalism \nSeparation of Powers \nChecks and Balances\n\nthe 7 ARTICLES are:\nArticle 1- establishes legislative branch\nArticle 2- Establishes and describes executive branch\nArticle 3- Describes and establishes Judicial branch\nArticle 4- States power and limits- describes the relationship between central gov't and state gov't\nArticle 5- describes how to amend the constitution\nArticle 6- Establishes Federal power and makes the constitution the "law of the land"\nArticle 7- Tells how to ratify the constitution
1075105
The ultimate answer is "The State Constitution".
649231
About facts on the Supreme Court,check\n\nhttp://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0875894.html\n\nhttp://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,622,00.html\n\nhttp://www.constitutionfacts.com/Supreme_ct/Supreme_ct.htm
130855
here you go:\nhttp://www.constitutioncenter.org/PressRoom/ImageDownloadCenter/index.shtml\n You can download a text version of it or images of the whole original!
21725
No provision of the Constitution allows secession.  This was a contested theory, of course, because no state had tried it, and many states thought they still reserved the right to secede.  New England even considered a plan well before the Civil War to secede, under the Hartford Convention of 1814.\n\nThe structure of the Constitution, however, seems to deny a secession theory.  The Constitution may be amended by 3/4 of the states, which means that 1/4 of the states could be bound by a law they did not agree with.  It doesn't seem like that a state could just secede if they wanted to, since the very structure of the Constitution bound states with laws they didn't agree with.\n\nThe Civil War, then, was not "illegal."  The President used troops to prevent a rebellion.  The Confederacy had violated the structure of the Constitution, and it had circumvented legal methods of achieving its desires (e.g., legislation, constitutional amendment).
45363
The 2005-2006 biennial legislative session will reconvene March 1, 2006.\n\nThe Legislature convenes in regular session each odd numbered year on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in January. In the even numbered years, it convenes on a date set by joint agreement of both bodies. The state constitution limits the Legislature to meeting 120 legislative days during each biennium. In addition, the Legislature may not meet in regular session after the first Monday following the third Saturday in May of any year (for constitutional provisions concerning the length of session and special sessions, see Minnesota Constitution, Article IV - Legislative Department). \n\n\n\nDuring this time, the House or the Senate may not adjourn for more than three days without the consent of the other body
106227
Gee, if there were only some kind of, oh I don't know, CONSTITUTION... or BILL OF RIGHTS.\nSeems like that would help.
757327
It would be a good idea to look up the 11th amendment to the US Constitution. I have and am completely without ideas as it is a hard one to capture in pictures. It gives citizens of any state the right to sue a state.
807350
Most US states have their own constitutions, just like the American Constitution.  The Constitution defines the state or country as an entity and is the foundation of the laws of the country or state.  They usually define the basic rights of the citizens and the workings of the government.
849962
Check out this site, it is great.  http://www.libertyskids.com/\nalso a good one.  http://www.constitutioncenter.org/explore/ForKids/index.shtml\n\nHere are others I have found\n\nhttp://www.congressforkids.net/games/articlesofconfederation/2_artofconf.htm\nhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/kids/constitution/backgrounder.html\nhttp://clerkkids.house.gov/games/index.html
136309
You’re asking a great deal, whole sections of libraries hold many books just on this one subject and you could spend a lifetime studying the nuances associated with this Amendment.  For example, It states. . . . . \n\n“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”\n\nThis has roots in the Articles of Confederation which state in Article II. . . . \n\n“Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.”\n\nThese were not simply words to the Founders, during the convention (4 December 1787), James Wilson (Delegate of Pennsylvania) said. . . . \n\n“ . . . Sir, I think there is another subject with regard to which this Constitution deserves approbation.  I mean the accuracy with which the line is drawn between the powers of the general government and those of the particular state governments.  We have heard some general observations, on this subject, from the gentlemen who conduct the opposition.  They have asserted that these powers are unlimited and defined.  They have already been answered by my honorable colleague, (Mr. M’Kean) therefore I shall not enter into an explanation.  But is is not pretended that the line is drawn with mathematical precision: the inaccuracy of the language must, to a certain degree, prevent the accomplishment of such desire.  Whoever views the matter in a true light, will see that the powers are as minutely enumerated and defined as was possible, and will also discover that the general clause, against which so much exception is taken, is nothing more than was necessary to render effectual the particular powers that are granted. . . ”\nContinuing he stated, “ . . . But let us suppose – and the supposition is very easy in the minds of the gentlemen on the other side – that there is some difficulty in ascertaining where the true line lies.  Are we therefore thrown into despair?  Are disputes between the general government and the state governments to be necessarily the consequence of inaccuracy? . . . ”\n\nMy point is that the Founders were both concerned and not of the same mind as to the consequences of the Constitution in the relationship between the general government and the several State governments.  This resulted in a wide difference as to the need of a Bill of Rights including the 10th Article.\n\nIt is also interesting to note that at the time of the convention, all States (colonies) had existing constitutions and these constitutions provided incentive to the writing of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  Here with one example, from The Declaration of Rights for the Constitution of the State of Pennsylvania. . . . . \n\n“Chapter I.  That all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and unalienable Rights, amongst which are the enjoying and defining life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.”\n\nEven after ratification differences arose and these few following selections from United States Supreme Court decisions demonstrate that reality.\n\nFrom the opinion of the U. S. Supreme Court case, Gordon v. United States [1864].  “The reservation to the States respectively can only mean the reservation of the rights of sovereignty which they respectively possessed before the adoption of the Constitution of the United States and which had not parted from by that instrument.”\n\nAnd then in the case of Kansas v. Colorado [1907].  “This Amendment disclosed the widespread fear that the National Government might, under the pressure of a supposed general warfare, attempt to exercise powers which had not been granted.  With equal determination the framers intended that no such assumption should eve
221348
http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0774837.html\nthat's a really good website it gives you all the info you need on the Judicial, executive, and Legislative braches of the governement it has a great over view of all three of the branches\nyou should ace this assigment with this article!\nBest of Luck!\n~Allie!
984235
You better believe it.  The framers were very wise to include these contingencies in the Constitution.\n\nYou get your chance on Tuesday :-)
39311
Several things including Indian Removal, The Nullification crisis and introducing the "spoils system"\n\nFor more information, view the link below.
65751
http://www.house.gov/house/Educate.shtml \nalong with access to the Federalist Papers Declaration of Indepence and other American Historical documents
101487
CONSTITUTION and Bill of Rights OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS\n\nhttp://www.harbornet.com/rights/illinois.txt\n\nVoters Bill of Rights\n\nhttp://www.equipforequality.org/programs/votingrights/votersbill.php