Arguments Against The Propisition 60

Abrego, Leisy. "Legitimacy, Social Identity, and the Mobilization of Law: The Effects of Assembly Bill 540 on Undocumented Students in California." Law & Social Inquiry 33.3 (2008): 709-734. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 3 Apr. 2010.

Immigration issues are not issues only encountered here in the United States, but are also issues faced throughout the world. There have been numerous of debates on the issues of immigration in the United States. The most controversial was the passing of a new bill in Arizona. Governor Jan Brewer passed into Arizona legislature the SB1070, which became very controversial because of the demands that this law was enforcing. This controversial bill gives any Arizona law enforcement personnel full authority to stop any people who they think have reasonable suspicion of living in the United States illegally. It also gives

Dating back to its admission into statehood, reform has been an undeniable element of California. It could even be argued that many important landmarks in our state history were defined by acts of reform, such as the implementation of direct democracy into its state constitution during the progressive era of the late 19th and early 20th century. In modern California, it could be argued that there has been no greater landmark than the passage of Proposition 140.

The 24 Amendment allows citizens to vote in federal elections regardless to them paying poll taxes or any other taxes. This amendment also allows congress to invoke this article at any time if necessary, as long as they have approval from the Senate.

The Constitution of the United States and the amendments that follow established the principles of our country. After the north won the civil war, reconstruction began in the south and several new laws were passed to support African American equality. In 1865, the 13th amendment was passed, which resulted in slavery being abolished. These newly freed men were made many promises. Among them were the promises of political, social, and economic justice. It seemed as though these promises would be kept as violating them was deemed unconstitutional. For example, the 14th amendment granted 3 rights to all men: the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, states cannot pass laws to abridge these rights, and the right that all men were seen equal before the law. Also, the 15th amendment was passed, which established the right to vote for all men, and thereby gave African Americans political power. In reality, however, these newly freed African Americans were still treated as inferior members of society. Reconstruction did not provide political, social, or economic justice to freed slaves.

this type of proposition is not new to the voters of california. In the past several

The Fifteenth Amendment granted black men to vote. Put emphasis on men because at this time women still couldn't vote.This amendment would not be fully followed until almost a century. What the government did was that they made a literacy test so difficult that no slave could pass because they had no education. So no blacks could vote really for a long time. So to loop their loophole that made a rule called the Grandfather Clause. This made if your grandfather could vote you did not have to take the literacy test. So every white person's grandfather could vote since they lived in england. So this rule did not apply to blacks since their grandfathers were black and could not vote. One of the main reasons that they made this rule is because

This Proposition has led to Proposition 62, Proposition 218, Proposition 37 and Santa Clara Measure A to name a few. Proposition 62 became effective on November 5, 1986 this said that majority vote was required for general taxes, a two-thirds vote was required for local special taxes, provisions that existing taxes passed after July 31, 1985 would be put before voters within two years, the elimination of property tax transfers and attempted to apply to

As a Canadian in today’s society we believe we have a certain set of inalienable rights. One of those rights that seem to be at the forefront of the 2015 Canadian election is privacy. As Dr. Kent Roach and Dr. Craig Forcese state, “privacy is, in our society, the right to be left alone by the state.” The Conservative upbringing of Bill C-51 challenges the ideology around our right to be private, as well as our government’s role in the protection of Canada from threats of terrorism. The Harper government essentially, will increase their role in national security to keep a constant watchful eye on potentially harmful situations and end them before anyone is hurt or killed. If passed, the bill would allow the government to arrest anyone suspected of terrorism without that person even committing a crime. Furthermore, the language used in the bill is extremely vague and makes one question, where the line will be drawn? Will our basic rights to peaceful protest and free speech be affected? Unfortunately perhaps they will. One of the most concerning parts of the bill in regard to privacy is the fact that the government will now be able to access several sensitive documents about citizens from top agencies such as the Public Health Agency, Canadian Border Services Agency as well as the Canadian Border Services Agency. Privacy is changing in Canada. This is a landmark bill and as such it is creating quite a splash in the ongoing Canadian Election.

Many people like to argue that prior to the ratification of the 13th Amendment different people or groups freed the slaves. However it was Abraham Lincoln who freed the slaves. Lincoln was not able to abolish slavery at first due to the fact that It was sanctioned by the highest law in the land, the Constitution. In which the Constitution included key clauses protecting the institution, including a fugitive slave clause and the three-fifths clause. Lincoln later in a three-hour speech in Illinois of 1854, he presented more clearly than ever his moral, legal and economic opposition to slavery. Only with his support of the eventual 13th Amendment, would Lincoln finally win over the most committed abolitionists. He used a multitude of methods to free the slaves, a small list that actually had an impact would start with his speech at Newhaven.

Slavery is alive in the United States of America; it’s just morphed to fit itself into modern times. Every time I see the text of the 13th Amendment, I wonder if that little caveat was intentional or just really naïve.

Thanks to the groundbreaking Thirteenth Amendment, no person may be forced to work except in retribution for a crime he or she committed. The Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution is often viewed only as the amendment that abolished the insufferable slavery of African-Americans, - and this does appear to be the case on the surface - however many more interpretations promise many useful arguments for the labor movement and cause controversy over its ineffectiveness in combating racism and its hand in creating the hotly-debated American for-profit prison system.

In the article “Creating a Criminal”, Michael Kingston targets California voters to argue that the new law, Section 598b of the California Penal Code, is simply a law that discriminates a minority group. In his article, Kingston manifests that the new law simply penalizes Vietnamese-American for their culture of raising dogs or pets for food although there had always been practices in American culture that abuse these same pets; such as, the practice of euthanasia on pets whose owners no longer want them, or even the use of pets for scientific experiences. Indeed, Kingston was successful in arguing that the Section 598b in a racially discriminatory law by appealing to logos, ethos and pathos.

What's the great urgency to mass the large force of RCMP to go in and take down the camp? I'm rather curious. Are they undertaking a test drive of Bill C-51 or exactly what's going on here?"

The main counterargument against this proposal is, that it is not necessary to change who is on the bill. The twenty-dollar bill still works as a currency no matter who is on the bill, so there is no point to changing it. It would also be disrespectful to just replace the seventh president of the United States, and just ignore all the good he has done for our country. While there is nothing wrong with how the currency works, there should be a change on who is on the bill. America is a changing nation and replacing Andrew Jackson with Harriet Tubman will not be an act that is unnecessary. This will be a sign to show that we are not just a nation that says we accept diversity but will show we are doing something about it. It is a step in the