what does the single-subject rule in Georgia's constitution mean?
609496
"People who believe marriages between men and women should have a unique and privileged place in our society may also believe that same-sex relationships should have some place -- although not marriage," she wrote.\n\nThe single-subject rule in the state constitution "protects the right of those people to hold both views and reflect both judgments by their vote,"
1163917
I'm not positive but I'm pretty sure that rule only applies to Louisana because they have a different legal system there then the rest of the country. It’s called the Louisiana Civil Code; it’s similar to the Napoleonic Code. It’s the only state in the union with this system.
295927
The original text of Article 1, Section 2, of the Constitution tied the allocation of representatives in Congress to population counts; the weight applied to each person differed by civil status. Specifically, for the purpose of reapportionment, each free person was to count as a whole person, each slave was to count as three-fifths of a person, and Indians not taxed were to be excluded.\n\nThat souonds like they thought of slaves as less than a person, and justified their participation in the institution of slavery.
850859
The fundamental rule is "No one can give what he has no got"\n\nSection 27, Sale of Goods Act :\n\n"... where goods are sold by a person who is not the owner thereof, and who does not sell them under the authority or with the consent of the owner, the buyer acquires no better title to the goods than the seller had..."\n\nThat's refer to the maxim "Nemo dat quod not habet" which means "no one can give a better title than he himself"
450813
Furman V. Georgia was a Supreme Court case in 1972. The ruling was requiring some consistency when giving out death penalty decisions. I'm not exactly sure what you're looking for but go to the website below, it has a lot of good information for any report you may need it for.\nHope it helps!
92039
As of 2004,\nThe current state constitution of Georgia has 64 radified amendments.
401162
http://www.legis.state.ga.us/cgi-bin/gl_codes_detail.pl?code=1-1-1
140420
According to a real literal reading of the Constitution, it would just be the "Court."  It refers to a supreme Court, not as the title "Supreme Court" but just to mean the highest court in the land as compared to the inferior courts.\n\nSo, the head of the Judicial Branch is "the Court."
488083
Specify wich Georgia.
799951
Federalist ->Sovereignty\nAnti-federalist ->Independence
772702
The term originates from it's Constitutional interpretation.  Strict Constructionism.\n\nThe idea is that the feelings of the majority at a given time, make bad, unreliable law.  \n\nThe rule of law (stare decisis) governs, and should not easily be changed for public opinion.\n \nThe role of government is limited to providing a strong military, regulating interstate commerce, and punishing crime.\n\nRights and responsibilities go hand in hand.\n\nThe belief that the individual does best with the least governmental controls.\n\nA belief that fewer governmental regulations spur economic progress.
75138
The preamble basically outlined the goals of the new Constitution when it was written. It also denotes powers in the government, but not specifically.
157530
The main way it affects such a case is that it forbids the states from denying to any person within its jurisdiction the "equal protection of the laws." Thus, the state must provide the same educational opportunities to minoritiy students as to everyone else.
658977
Two clauses in the First Amendment guarantee freedom of religion. The establishment clause prohibits the government from passing legislation to establish an official religion or preferring one religion over another. It enforces the "separation of church and state. Some governmental activity related to religion has been declared constitutional by the Supreme Court. For example, providing bus transportation for parochial school students and the enforcement of "blue laws" is not prohibited. The free exercise clause prohibits the government, in most instances, from interfering with a persons practice of their religion. \n\nThe most basic component of freedom of expression is the right of freedom of speech. The right to freedom of speech allows individuals to express themselves without interference or constraint by the government. The Supreme Court requires the government to provide substantial justification for the interference with the right of free speech where it attempts to regulate the content of the speech. A less stringent test is applied for content-neutral legislation. The Supreme Court has also recognized that the government may prohibit some speech that may cause a breach of the peace or cause violence. The right to free speech includes other mediums of expression that communicate a message.
704789
The world is different than it was when the Constitution was ratified in 1789, and this is a process to update it to the current standards. It is also a way to clarify some of the language that may be vague (as in the 11th Amendment).\n\nFor example, in Article I, Section 2, it use to state, "...which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons". This was amended by the 14 Amendment to be, "any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States". This was later changed with the 19th Amendment (Women's Suffrage) and the 26th Amendment (Voting Age Set to 18 Years).
244501
Some ONE would be a directive, referring to one specific person who will perform an action or take responsibility or ownership. Some BODY would be a generalization, an unknown subject.
870257
The "necessary and proper" clause of Article I Section 8 (and various amendments) basically allows Congress to go beyond the literal text of its enumerated powers, and enact related laws that support those enumerated goals.\n\nIn a strict interpretation, only those laws directly related to the goals, and neither over or under inclusive, would be permitted. In other words, only the most absolutely necessary laws are allowed.\n\nIn a loose interpretation, any law that is "rationally related" to those goals is permitted. This is the current interpretation, and has been for most of the past century. That's also why the federal government has passed countless laws that are barely linked at all to constitutional mandates. But since Congress can argue that there is some rational connection, no matter how faint, they survive constitutional scrutiny.\n\nHere's a simple example. Congress has the authority to regulate interstate commerce, and the means by which it is conducted.\n\nIn a strict interpretation, this allows them to deal with interstate taxes, and to pay to support interstate roads, and to deal with interstate fraud crimes. But that's it. Anything that happens within one state, or anything that is not directly a commercial transaction between parties in different states, would be off limits.\n\nIn a loose interpretation, Congress can regulate any activity that has any impact whatsoever on interstate commerce. So, they can regulate how much food you grow in your personal garden, even if it's only for your own personal consumption, because the cumulative effect of everyone having their own garden would have an overall cumulative impact on interstate commerce (this is an actual Supreme Court case). \n\nAlso in a loose interpretation, Congress can forbid racial discrimination in any public restaurant or lodging house, because the net cumulative effect of racial discrimination would alter tourism and travel habits, which would have some impact on the overall national interstate commerce practices.\n\nThe issue is how closely the regulated activity needs to be to the enumerated goals that Congress is allowed to pursue. Strict interpretation requires a very close direct link. The current loose interpretation allows pretty much anything.