Daily Archives: January 18, 2022

Law

Under U.S. constitutional law, a “minimum rational basis” test is used in the context of homosexuality: the government’s aim must be legitimate, and the means must be rationally related to this aim. Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996) (invalidating under rational basis test state constitutional amendment barring government agencies from adopting rules or policies that provide homosexual, lesbian, and bisexual classes protection against discrimination).

Note that Article 21 of Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability. Is this an emerging customary international legal norm? Has the United States accepted the norm by adopting the Americans with Disabilities Act?

U.S. constitutional law distinguishes between intentionally discriminatory actions and those with a disparate impact. Ordinarily, statutes with a disparate impact are required to satisfy only a requirement of rationality, while sometimes statutes that intentionally discriminate must satisfy a more stringent standard. Does the Human Rights Committee take a different approach? What justifications are there for distinguishing between intentional discrimination and disparate impact? Are they relevant to the problem in Simunek? Examine the racial and birth discrimination claims in Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali v. United Kingdom, 94 Eur. Ct. H. R. (ser. A) (1985). Would these claims have succeeded under the UN Human Rights Committee’s analysis in Simunek?

Law

U.S. constitutional law distinguishes between intentionally discriminatory actions and those with a disparate impact. Ordinarily, statutes with a disparate impact are required to satisfy only a requirement of rationality, while sometimes statutes that intentionally discriminate must satisfy a more stringent standard. Does the Human Rights Committee take a different approach? What justifications are there for distinguishing between intentional discrimination and disparate impact? Are they relevant to the problem in Simunek?

Examine the racial and birth discrimination claims in Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali v. United Kingdom, 94 Eur. Ct. H. R. (ser. A) (1985). Would these claims have succeeded under the UN Human Rights Committee’s analysis in Simunek?

Consider Schmidt v. Germany, 291-B Eur. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) (1994)

History

Consider Schmidt v. Germany, 291-B Eur. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) (1994). A German law required all male residents – but not female residents – of Tettnang, Germany, to either volunteer to work for the firemen or to pay a fee in contribution to the firemen. The male applicant challenged the fire-service levy as unlawful gender discrimination in violation of Article 14, ECHR. Howerver, Article 4(3)(d), ECHR, allows an exception to the prohibition against compulsory labor for normal civic obligations to ECHR states parties. The compulsory fire service in Schmidt’s town fell within this exception. The alternative financial contribution was considered a “compensatory charge” and because of its close links with the obligation to serve, also fell within the scope of Article 4(3)(d). The European Court stated that very….

Under U.S. constitutional law, a “heightened rational basis” test is used in the context of gender discrimination: the classification must serve “important” governmental objectives, and the discriminatory means employed must be “substantially related” to the achievement of these ends.

History

Under U.S. constitutional law, a “heightened rational basis” test is used in the context of gender discrimination: the classification must serve “important” governmental objectives, and the discriminatory means employed must be “substantially related” to the achievement of these ends. Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan, 458 U.S. 718 (1982); see also United States v. Virginia, 116 S.Ct. 2264 (1996) (gender discrimination unconstitutional in absence of “exceedingly persuasive justification”).

Under U.S. federal statutory law, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex by employers. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 extended the definition of sex to include pregnancy. International Union, UAW v. Johnson Controls, 499 U.S. 187 (1991). Refusal to hire on these grounds as well as harassment and hostile working….

As you learned earlier, a design check set is a collection of one or more design checks. For profiles, there are two types of design checks:

As you learned earlier, a design check set is a collection of one or more design checks. For profiles, there are two types of design checks: line and curve. When a design check set is applied to a profile, Civil 3D flags any violations with a triangular yellow shield marked with an exclamation point. You can hover over the shield to get more information about the violation.

In this exercise, you’ll apply a design check set to the Jordan Court profile and then make some edits to address design violations.

1. Open the drawing named Design Check Set.dwg located in the Chapter 07 class data folder.

2. Click the Jordan Court FGCL profile, and then click Profile Properties on the ribbon.

3. In the Profile Properties dialog box,….

In this exercise, you’ll apply section styles to differentiate between sections that represent finished ground, existing ground, and rock surfaces.

In this exercise, you’ll apply section styles to differentiate between sections that represent finished ground, existing ground, and rock surfaces.

1. Open the drawing named Applying Section Styles.dwg located in the Chapter 11 class data folder.

Here, you see three section views that were plotted to investigate the shallow rock layer. The section views show a corridor section, existing ground surface section, and rock section.

2. Click the lowest section in the 8+50.00 (0+260.00) section view, and then click Section Properties on the Section: Rock ribbon tab.

3. On the Information tab of the Section Properties dialog box, change Object Style to Rock. Click OK to close the dialog box. Press Esc to clear the selection.

The rock section now appears as a gray dashed line.

4. Repeat….

Jurors may be a priori biased for or against the prosecution in a criminal trial.

Jurors may be a priori biased for or against the prosecution in a criminal trial. Each juror is questioned by both the prosecution and the defense (the voir dire process), but this may not reveal bias. Even if bias is revealed, the judge may not excuse the juror for cause because of the narrow legal de nition of bias. For a randomly selected candidate for the jury, de ne events B0, B1, and B2 as the juror being unbiased, biased against the prosecution, and biased against the defense, respectively. Also let C be the event that bias is revealed during the questioning and D be the event that the juror is eliminated for cause. Let bi P(Bi ) (i 0, 1, 2),C [ Fair Number of Peremptory Challenges….

Simulation studies are important in investigating various characteristics of a system or process.