Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
1986 California Proposition 60; 1988 California Proposition 90; 1988 California Proposition 98; 1996 California Proposition 209; 1996 California Proposition 218; 1996 California Proposition 218 (Local Initiative Power) Senate Constitutional Amendment 5; 1998 California Proposition 10; 2000 California Proposition 39; 2004 California Proposition 59
Although striking in a trade union is a way of exercising freedom of assembly and freedom of association, other aspects of the conduct of the workers depicted here, such as pedestrian blocking of vehicle traffic in whichever direction has the right of way at this signal-controlled intersection, may violate local or state laws such as California ...
The Supreme Court declined Monday to take up an appeal from conservative states challenging California’s ability to establish strict vehicle emission rules that effectively set the standard for ...
A convention to propose amendments to the United States Constitution, also referred to as an Article V Convention, state convention, [1] or amendatory convention is one of two methods authorized by Article Five of the United States Constitution whereby amendments to the United States Constitution may be proposed: on the Application of two thirds of the State legislatures (that is, 34 of the 50 ...
California Civil Code Section 22.2 is as follows: "The common law of England, so far as it is not repugnant to or inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, or the Constitution or laws of this State, is the rule of decision in all the courts of this State."
In the United States, the emission standards for non-road diesel engines are published in the US Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 89 (40 CFR Part 89). Tier 1–3 Standards were adopted in 1994 and was phased in between 1996 and 2000 for engines over 37 kW (50 hp). In 1998 the regulation included engines under 37 kW and introduced ...
In 1922, the Supreme Court held in Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon that governmental regulations that went "too far" were a taking. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, writing for the majority of the court, stated that "[t]he general rule at least is that while property may be regulated to a certain extent, if regulation goes too far it will be recognized as a taking."
The amendment as proposed by Congress in 1789 and ratified by the states: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be ...