There is no proportional representation requirement in the Equal Protection Clause.
The takings clause of the Fifth Amendment is for conservatives what the equal protection clause of the 14th is for liberals.
The 'takings' clause of the Fifth Amendment is for conservatives what the equal protection clause of the 14th is for liberals.
A ban on same-sex marriage violates the state Constitution's equal protection clause.
When the 14th Amendment, equal protection clause was enacted, the galleries in the Senate were segregated. Now we have integration.
Ultimately, I think the Equal Protection Clause does guarantee same-sex marriage in all fifty states.
It wouldn't be fair to say that conservatives cherish property the way liberals cherish equality. But it would be fair to say that the takings clause is the conservatives recipe for judicial activism just as they say liberals have misused the equal protection clause.
It wouldn't be fair to say that conservatives cherish property the way liberals cherish equality. But it would be fair to say that the takings clause is the conservatives' recipe for judicial activism just as they say liberals have misused the equal protection clause.
I don't care if you're from the right or left of politics - there are core objectives we can all agree on: equal pay, equal representation on the media, equal representation at board level, politics, an end to domestic violence.
It's time to recognize that under the equal protection clause of the United States [Constitution], same-sex couples should have the same rights as anybody else.
I was tremendously fortunate to be alive and a lawyer, working at a university so I had more flexible hours, when the women's movement was coming alive and when it became possible to argue successfully for a view of the equal protection clause that included women.
Money is speech. It's incongruous to say a multimillionaire can spend as much on his own campaign as he wants, but you can only give $2,300. His free speech rights are different from yours, thus violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. It's absurd.
The guarantee of equal protection cannot mean one thing when applied to one individual and something else when applied to a person of another color. If both are not accorded the same protection, then it is not equal.
I can only speak for myself and what feminism means to me, and that is equality for every human being: equal rights, equal representation, equal pay, etc.
Proportional representation is as British as first-past-the-post.
Israel's system of proportional representation rarely produces stable government.