Essay on The Unconstitutional Laws of Oklahoma

In the case Lawrence v. Texas (539 U.S. 558, 2003) which was the United States Supreme Court case the criminal prohibition of the homosexual pederasty was invalidated in Texas. The same issue has been already addressed in 1989 in the case Bowers v. Hardwick, however, the constitutional protection of sexual privacy was not found at that time. Lawrence overruled Bowers and held that sexual conduct was the right protected by the due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. The effects of the ruling were quite widespread and led to invalidation of the similar laws throughout the United States that tried to criminalize the homosexual activity of adults which were acting in privacy. The case attracted much of the public

We can conclude that in order to amend the Texas constitution a proposal must be initiated during a regular session or special session of the legislator. In addition, a unanimous two-thirds vote must be achieved before an election can be held for the people to vote on the amendment. Although citizens voiced their concerns for reform of the constitution during the 1970’s only one reform attempt resulted in an opportunity for the electorate to vote. In the end the constitutional reform did not succeed because of shady tactics, specific individuals, and fear of change. The recent Supreme Court Ruling on gay marriages is an example of why the Texas constitution is to constrict and non-free flowing. Due to the fact that it is so detailed they would not of had the ability to allow gay marriages to be legal without a specific

The Texas anti-abortion law has taken the country’s attention by storm. It is an issue on many different woman’s minds, especially those who live in the state of Texas. The new laws are forcing many woman to have to cross state lines in order to receive an abortion and medical care. This includes woman who needs abortions due to preexisting medical conditions and those who are carrying fetuses which are diseased and are expected not to be born as healthy babies. The Texas Governor Rick Perry and Senator Ted Cruz are leading the fight for the abortion laws to become permanent, laws that are considered the strictest abortion laws that this country has ever seen.

law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.") allows other amendments

Although Obama’s law may not have passed, many have throughout the last couple hundred years. Amendments have also been proposed throughout history when laws were not enough to suit the peoples ever changing needs. New Hampshire called for an amendment that stated, "that no

As has always been the case, anything handed from the federal government is immediately disregarded by the States. State legislatures have been working tirelessly to make it almost impossible for women to receive the procedure. How do these states justify blatantly flying in the face a ruling from the

"The Court today is correct in holding that the right asserted by Jane Roe is embraced within the personal liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. It is evident that the Texas abortion statute infringes that right directly. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine a more complete abridgment of a constitutional freedom than that worked by the inflexible criminal statute now in force in Texas. The question then becomes whether the state interests advanced to justify this abridgment can survive the 'particularly careful scrutiny' that the Fourteenth Amendment here requires. The asserted state interests are protection of the health and safety of the pregnant woman, and protection of the potential

The Texas Constitutions have achieved these purposes in a sense, but neglected some more than others. The original Texas Constitution of 1876 reflects conservatism,

These ordinances banned animal sacrifice within city limits, stating the practice was ?inconsistent with public morals, peace, or safety? (Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah (91-948), 1993).After suing the city, the congregation encountered difficulties as the District Court (and later the Appellate Court) ruled in favor of the city. The case was further appealed and heard by the Supreme Court on July 11, 1993, two years after Employment Division v. Smith (Chicago-Kent College of Law, 2015), which similarly dealt with a minority religion suing on the grounds of a violation of the First Amendment. In Employment Division, the court favored the Employment Division of Oregon because the laws passed by the state

As like many Americans don't agree with everything in the United States constitution, some people didn't agree with the Texas constitution saying that they are giving up their protection in a lot of the articles. The Bill of Rights gives the first ten amendments and was in thought to be incorporation which would change the way criminal justice systems of the state to make these things national protections.

The counties in Texas have an odd relationship with the state government and the Texas constitution. The counties are under the state and they are required to handle duties that the state rants them. However, the counties are strongly against the involvement of the state government. Brown (2014) states that “both county officials and county residents see them as local governments and resent any state ‘interference’” (p.110). The counties are charged with the responsibilities of collecting taxes on both urban and rural property, issues state automobile licenses, enforce state laws, register voters, conduct elections, and help administer justice. The counties, along with state and federal governments, “conducts health and welfare programs, maintains

Many of Rick Perry’s decisions assert his support of the 10th amendment, but perhaps the most monumental indicator may be his book, Fed Up! in which he accuses the federal system of being a tyrannical government that takes too much power from the states and stresses repetitively that the states matter more. In his preface, he emphasizes, “I believe that states are critical components of our federal system of government, that the Founders recognized their importance, and that empowering the states is the best way to ensure our God-given right to live according to the dictates of our consciences.” To sum it up, Rick Perry’s core belief is that giving state governments the freedom to regulate their economy, business, health-care, and education on their own without government intrusion is the only way to go.

The people of Texas have seen many changes to state government since receiving their independence from Mexico. The state has been governed by six different constitutions. The most recent was written during the Constitutional Convention of 1875, and adopted February 15, 1876 by popular vote. This constitution contains sixteen articles, and four hundred eighty-three amendments. Throughout thus essay, the role of the state constitution will be examined along with a comparison of the U.S. and Texas Constitutions, and rationale for a potential rewriting of the document.

Within 24 hours after passage, Brenda, a civil rights attorney, brings a cause of action in federal court to have the new regulation ruled unconstitutional. The federal court immediately rules that the state law violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment and issues an injunction against its enforcement.

This was a prime example of the “negative liberties” that Sanger mentions. Carol describes negative liberties as “things the government can’t do to you-but does not provide the means to affirmatively enjoy the rights provided in the Bill itself” (28). Just like in the case of Harris V. McRae where there was liberties but where there was also limits to those liberties. Although the government