Tom Horne Goes After Paulo Freire Books While Sanitizing American History. The latest bout of virulent racism at the state level in Arizona features, of all people, Arizona's state superintendent of public instruction. Tom Horne (R), who is running for state attorney general, is all about banning ethnic studies courses, except, of course, the white studies course that is sold across the U. S. as American History. In so doing, Horne is focused on atomizing any constituency that could coalesce to challenge white Republican rule in Arizona, and in the process, he seems intent also upon arresting any book that may be deemed appropriate to encourage people to live as authentic human beings and to participate actively in shaping their own lives.
From the New York Times: . . . . The new law, which takes effect at the end of the year, is a victory for Tom Horne, the state superintendent of public instruction, who has fought for years to end Tucson’s ethnic studies programs, which he believes teach students to feel oppressed and resent whites. No. 97-16095. - RICE v. CAYETANO - US 9th Circuit. Harold F. RICE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Benjamin J. CAYETANO, Governor of the State of Hawai‘i; Mazie K. Hirono, Lieutenant Governor of the State of Hawai‘i, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 97-16095. Argued and Submitted May 5, 1998. -- June 22, 1998 Before JAMES R. Hawaii holds special elections for trustees of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA), who must be Hawaiian and who administer public trust funds set aside for the betterment of “native Hawaiians” and “Hawaiians,” in which only people who meet the blood quantum requirement for “native Hawaiian” or “Hawaiian” may vote.1 There is a long history behind the use and structure of the public lands trust for the benefit of descendants of the original races inhabiting the Hawaiian Islands, none of which is challenged in this appeal. Harold F. Some history is helpful by way of background.4 Hawaii was admitted to the union as a state in 1959. Rice was born and has always lived in Hawaii. 1. 2.
U.S. Constitution - Amendment 14. Civil action for deprivation of rights. MORTON V. MANCARI, 417 U. S. 535 :: Volume 417 :: 1974 :: US Supreme Court Cases from Justia & Oyez. The Oyez Project | U.S. Supreme Court Oral Argument Recordings, Case Abstracts and More. RICE V. CAYETANO. RICE V. CAYETANO dissent. HAROLD F. RICE, PETITIONER v. BENJAMINJ. CAYETANO, GOVERNOR OF HAWAII [February 23, 2000] Justice Stevens, with whom Justice Ginsburg joins as to Part II, dissenting. The Court’s holding today rests largely on the repetition of glittering generalities that have little, if any, application to the compelling history of the State of Hawaii.
According to the terms of the federal Act by which Hawaii was admitted to the Union, and to the terms of that State’s Constitution and laws, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) is charged with managing vast acres of land held in trust for the descendants of the Polynesians who occupied the Hawaiian Islands before the 1778 arrival of Captain Cook. Today the Court concludes that Hawaii’s method of electing the trustees of OHA violates the Fifteenth Amendment. That conclusion is in keeping with three overlapping principles. Throughout our Nation’s history, this Court has recognized both the plenary power of Congress over the affairs of native Americans. Reynolds v. Sims, U.S. Supreme Court Case Summary & Oral Argument. Argument of W.
McLean Pitts Chief Justice Earl Warren: Number 23, B.A. Reynolds, etc., et al., Appellants, versus M.O. Sims, et al. Mr. Pitts, you may proceed with your argument. Mr. It is with great humility that I appear before this Court in view of some of the propositions that we are going to make to this Court in behalf of the appellants in this case. I will briefly go through some of the -- the points that lead up to the decision in this case. We'll go in to historically a little of the Alabama history relative to its constitutional convention, the Acts of the legislature that are involved.
On March the 26th, this Court gave the -- handed down the decision of Baker versus Carr which was somewhat a radical departure from the cases from 1803 to 1962. They leave essentially in fact the distribution and possession of political power by contrast. On July the 12th, 1962, the Alabama Legislature produced two bills. One, legislative reapportionment should be resolved without federal interference. Fifteenth Amendment--Rights of Citizens to Vote.
Adarand Constructors v. Pena, U.S. Supreme Court Case Summary & Oral Argument. *204 Justice O'Connor announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion with respect to Parts I, II, III—A, III—B, III—D, and IV, which is for the Court except insofar as it might be inconsistent with the views expressed in Justice Scalia's concurrence, and an opinion with respect to Part III—C in which Justice Kennedy joins. Petitioner Adarand Constructors, Inc., claims that the Federal Government's practice of giving general contractors on Government projects a financial incentive to hire subcontractors controlled by "socially and economically disadvantaged individuals," and in particular, the Government's use of race-based presumptions in identifying such individuals, violates the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. The Court of Appeals rejected Adarand's claim.
We conclude, however, that courts should analyze cases of this kind under a different standard of review than the one the Court of Appeals applied. 103rd Congress (1993 - 1994) - H.R.2401. SALYER LAND CO. V. TULARE WATER DIST., 410 U. S. 719 :: Volume 410 :: 1973 :: US Supreme Court Cases from Justia & Oyez. Office of Hawaiian Affairs - Home. Organic act. An Act to Provide a Government for the Territory of Hawaii (Act of April 30, 1900, c 339, 31 Stat 141) §1. Definitions. That the phrase "the laws of Hawaii," as used in this Act without qualifying words, shall mean the constitution and laws of the Republic of Hawaii, in force on the twelfth day of August, eighteen hundred and ninety-eight, at the time of the transfer of the sovereignty of the Hawaiian Islands to the United States of America.
The constitution and statute laws of the Republic of Hawaii then in force, set forth in a compilation made by Sidney M. Ballou under the authority of the legislature, and published in two volumes entitled "Civil Laws" and "Penal Laws," respectively, and in the Session Laws of the Legislature for the session of eighteen hundred and ninety-eight, are referred to in this Act as "Civil Laws," "Penal Laws," and "Session Laws. " This is the Act, as since amended, of April 30, 1900, c 339, 31 Stat 141 (2 Supp. Papakilo Database. 739 F.2d 1467: Keaukaha-panaewa Community Association, et al., Plaintiffs-appellants, v. Hawaiian Homes Commission, et al., Defendants-appellees :: US Court of Appeals Cases.
This is a claim pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 by a group of native Hawaiians against the Hawaiian Homes Commission, and other agencies and officials, to remedy the loss of approximately 25 acres of the Hawaiian home lands. In 1921, Congress enacted the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act which mandated that certain lands, designated the Hawaiian home lands, be held in trust for the benefit of native Hawaiians. In 1959, when Hawaii was admitted into the union, section 4 of the Hawaiian Admission Act, Public Law No. 86-3, 73 Stat. 4, 5 (1959), required that the provisions of the Commission Act be incorporated into the constitution of the state.
The incorporation was described "as a compact with the United States. " The Admission Act reiterated the state's obligation to hold the lands in trust and retained a right of federal government intervention to protect the trust. Keaukaha-Panaewa Community Association v. After our decision in Keaukaha I, the Supreme Court in Maine v.