Explore >> Select a destination
|
You are here 
|
www.prisonpolicy.org | ||
| | | | |
supreme.justia.com
|
|
| | | | | Bush v. Gore: Despite violating the Fourteenth Amendment by using disparate vote-counting procedures in different counties, Florida did not need to complete a recount in the 2000 presidential election because it could not be accomplished in a constitutionally valid way within the time limit set by federal law for resolving these controversies. | |
| | | | |
dissidentvoice.org
|
|
| | | | | Faramarz Farbod: You have taught at Princeton University for four decades; you were the UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories in Israel (2008-2014); and you are the author of numerous books about global issues and international law. In preparation for this conversation, I have been reading your autobiography, Public Intellectual: | |
| | | | |
www.law.cornell.edu
|
|
| | | | | [AI summary] The text discusses the legal and historical context surrounding campaign finance regulations, particularly focusing on the regulation of corporate and union political speech. It highlights key Supreme Court cases such as Buckley v. Valeo, Citizens United v. FEC, and McConnell v. FEC, which have shaped the understanding of corporate expenditures in elections. The text emphasizes the distinction between direct contributions and independent expenditures, the role of PACs, and the rationale behind restrictions on corporate spending to prevent corruption and the appearance thereof. It also references the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) and the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA), noting how they have been upheld by the Court as legitimate exer... | |
| | | | |
www.rtjgolf.com
|
|
| | | Beat the heat with summer deals from the Trail. | ||
