Anti-nepotism rules in the United States date back to the turn of the century: however, since the early 1970s, there have been numerous legal challenges to such policies and regulations. Often, the plaintiffs are professionals who have been denied employment, transferred or even dismissed because their spouses already worked for the same organization or because their spouses were promoted to supervisory positions over them. These plaintiffs contend that they have a legal right to work with their spouses, that anti-nepotism rules are discriminatory against them and that such rules violate their constitutional right to marry. What are the legal liabilities of governmental agencies and officials in this emerging area of public personnel law? An analysis of recent federal and state court decisions revealed that most judges do not interpret anti-nepotism rules to be either discriminatory or a direct violation of a fundamental constitutional right. The kind of rule at issue does not appear to be a factor in judicial opinions. For example, federal constitutional right to marry cases cover a variety of situations, including rules against one spouse supervising the other, and policies against married couples working in the same governmental department. Federal judges have subjected all anti-nepotism rules to only minimal scrutiny, deferring to management in virtually every instance.(1) Management Rationales for Anti-Nepotism Rules
Both anti-nepotism rules and merit system regulations seek to protect the competency of the workforce, yet, paradoxically, qualified job applicants are often turned away, and valuable employees are frequently transferred or even fired because of anti-nepotism policies. Poor performance is rarely the issue in such cases.(2) Rather, most organizations restrict married co-workers to some degree because of an assumption that the family is a potentially disruptive influence In the workplace.(3) According to Kanter, the main reason for having...
Fundamentals of Constitutional History - Notes
Refer to Table 1-1 of The American Democracy, and in 100 to 150 words, identify and explain America’s 3 core political ideals and the 3 rules of American politics.
America’s 3 core political ideals are; Liberty, Equality and Self-government.
Liberty – individuals should have the freedom to act and think the way they want, as long as it is within reason and it doesn’t interfere with the freedoms of others.
Equality – all individuals should be treated equally, morally, by law, and in their political voice.
Self-government – the idea that the people are the absolute source and correct beneficiary of governing authority and must have a voice in how they are governed.
The 3 rules of American politics are; democracy, constitutionalism, and capitalism.
Democracy – form of government in which the people govern, either directly or through elected representatives.
Constitutionalism – idea that there are definable limits on the rightful power of a government over its citizens.
Capitalism – economic system based on the idea that government should interfere with economic transactions as little as possible. Free enterprise and self-reliance are the collective and individual principles that underpin capitalism.
In 50 to 100 words, analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation and why the U.S. Constitution replaced it.
The Articles of Confederation is...
...Running Head: FUNDAMENTALRIGHTS 1
FundamentalRights: What Defines Them
Rocheen Dawn Pearson
“We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
Preamble – Constitution of the United States
Fundamental orders (rights) date back to biblical days, recorded by Moses in the first chapter of Deuteronomy (Skousen, 2009). In essence, religious order and belifs are the foundation of our Constitution. The Constitution was drafted by a wide variety of men who, although from different backgrounds and areas of the country, shared beliefs concerning religious principles, political guidelines, economic rudiments, and long-ranged social goals. Because individual liberty lies at the core of the American constitutional system, more rights are protected under law in the United States than in other societies (Hall, 2005).
The first ten amendments to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, were intended to delineate the fundamentalrights of the people of the United States. The...
...The FundamentalRights are defined as the basic human rights of all citizens. These rights, defined in Part III of the Constitution, apply irrespective of race, place of birth, religion, caste, creed or sex. They are enforceable by the courts, subject to specific restrictions.
The Directive Principles of State Policy are guidelines for the framing of laws by the government. These provisions, set out in Part IV of the Constitution, are not enforceable by the courts, but the principles on which they are based are fundamental guidelines for governance that the State is expected to apply in framing and passing laws.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES AND FUNDAMENTALRIGHTSFundamentalRights and Directive Principle are integral components of the same organic constitutional system and no conflict between them could have been intended by founding fathers. But the view of Supreme Court on the relationship between FundamentalRights and Directive Principles have not been uniform throughout. There are three possible views on the relationship between FundamentalRights and Directive Principles. The first view is that former are the superior to the latter and so the latter must give way to the former in case of repugnancy or irreconcilable conflict between the two. The second...
...importance of rights and demanded that the British rulers should respect rights of the people. The Constitution listed the rights that would be specially protected and called them ‘fundamentalrights’.These rights are defined in part III of Indian constitution
The word fundamental suggests that these rights are so important that the Constitution has separately listed them and made special provisions for their protection. The FundamentalRights are so important that the Constitution itself ensures that they are not violated by the government
FundamentalRights are different from other rights available to us. While ordinary legal rights are protected and enforced by ordinary law, FundamentalRights are protected and guaranteed by the constitution of the country. Ordinary rights may be changed by the legislature by ordinary process of law making, but a fundamentalright may only be changed by amending the Constitution itself. Besides this, no organ of the government can act in a manner that violates them. Judiciary has the
powers and responsibility to protect the fundamentalrights from violations by actions of the government. Executive as well as legislative actions can be...
...FundamentalRights are those rights and freedoms of the people of India, which enjoy constitutional recognition and guarantee. The Supreme Court of India and State High Courts have the power to enforce FundamentalRights. Supreme court is the guardian protector of fundamentalrights.
A very detailed Bill of Rights It is a very detailed and comprehensive Bill ofRights. It contains 24 Articles from 12 to 35. These describe in detail the fundamentalrights of the people of India.
People enjoy only the rights given in the Constitution. The Constitution of India does not give any recognition to natural or un-granted rights People of India enjoy only those fundamentalrights.
Special Rights for the Minorities. The India bill of Rights guarantees some special rights to the minorities. Cultural and educational rights have been granted to them. It abolishes untouched and makes it’s a crime. It has also granted special protections to women, children and the weaker sections of society.
Lack of Social and Economic Rights: It grants only civil rights and freedoms. Rights like Right to Work, Right to Leisure, and...
FundamentalRights are an important part in the Constitution of India. It guarantees civil liberties for Indians to lead their lives in peace and harmony. These includes, equality before law, freedom of speech and expression, and peaceful assembly, freedom to practice religion, and the right to constitutional remedies for the protection of civil rights by means of writs such as habeas corpus, quo-warranto, mandamus, certiorari, and prohibition. Violation of these rights is directly challengeable under the ambit of the Indian constitution by art. 32 and art. 226 . The FundamentalRights are defined as basic human freedoms which every Indian citizen has the right to enjoy for a proper and harmonious development of personality. These rights universally apply to all citizens, irrespective of race, place of birth, religion, caste, creed, colour or gender. Aliens (persons who are not citizens) are also considered in matters like equality before law. They are enforceable by the courts, subject to certain restrictions. The Rights have their origins in many sources, including England's Bill of Rights, the United States Bill of Rights and France's Declaration of the Rights of Man
Instructions for teacher
1. The teacher should explain the meaning of...
...governmental structure established a mission statement of American politics which still exists in our government today: the power of the fundamentalrights of the individual. The states had gained true independence under this configuration and this ideal was something that many opponents of the ratification of the Constitution were refusing to sacrifice. Implementing a central government would shift power from the newly sovereignty of that states that had not been easily obtained and this ignited a fear of possible “tyranny of the majority” if the Constitution was eventually ratified. Submitting to a Constitution meant that they would have to place a sense of trust into a strong central government and this was not something taken lightly. Facing a declining economy amongst other problems brought on by the Articles of Confederation, something had to be done to remedy the unforeseen issues between the states. Both federalists and anti-federalists induced a great debate through the means of numerous publications released to the public prior to the ratification of the Constitution.
In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson asserted that:
“all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their...
...ConstitutionalRightsConstitutionalRights are afforded to every American Citizen by the first ten amendments to the Constitution or more commonly known as The Bill of Rights. The fourth amendment of The Bill of Rights applies to all and states, "the right of the people to be secure in their persons" (para.4). When a person accepts a position anywhere, whether at a small family owned grocery store or a major corporation, one does so with the understanding that some inalienable rights will be given up. This paper examines if an employer can crush those rights by using lie detector tests, monitor employee phone calls and emails; use surveillance cameras, and issue random drug-testing.
The American Civil Liberties Union states, "drug testing of individuals without cause is ineffective, expensive and, often times, illegal" (para. 1) as well as, "drug testing of individuals without cause is an affront to the Fourth Amendment" (para. 2). While the fourth amendment does state, "the right of the people to be secure in their persons," it does not imply that only the employee is to be secure in his person (para.4). At Kelsey High School, the administration has come to the conclusion that drug-testing while expensive and legal is in fact, effective. The children's safety while in the care of the school is the...