You'll immediately notice that the extension places a red "X" after the 139th character of a tweet it abridges.
|
|
In his appeal, Kahler's lawyers will argue before the high court that denying the defense abridges due process, according to the news service.
|
|
Increasing the tempo of peristalsis abridges the colon's opportunity to absorb liquid, which means that the situation can quickly turn both wet and wild and stop you from living your best life, Sonpal tells me.
|
|
Two-layer network proposal for ABridges. With the objective of enhancing the properties of Abridges protocol, a two-level hierarchical link layer infrastructure in which segmentation is performed at link layer is proposed. The core will be composed, primarily, by Abridges (Bridges using an implementation of AMSTP) and will oversee connecting the leaf access networks that are referred to as "access layer". Besides, each of this access networks, also called islands, will be a layer-two sub-network using STP connected to one or more Abridges.
|
|
The 2002 revision is more current, handier and more affordable than its predecessor. However, it abridges the text and eliminates most of the illustrations.
|
|
The primary difference between a vegan and a lacto-vegetarian diet is the avoidance of dairy products. Vegans do not consume dairy products, believing that their production causes the animal suffering or a premature death, or otherwise abridges animal rights.
|
|
This protocol, developed in emphasizes in the terms of efficiency in network usage and path length. That's the main cause why it uses AMSTP, a simplified and self-configuring version of MSTP protocol. Abridges can be described as a two-tiered hierarchy of layer-two switches in which network islands running independent rapid spanning tree protocols communicate through a core formed by island root bridges (ABridges). As it has been mentioned, it is focused in terms of efficiency, this is due to the ability of AMSTP to provide optimum paths in the core mesh and the usage of RSTP to aggregate efficiently the traffic at islands networks.
|
|
It deviates from the original in every > possible way; transposes, expands, abridges, adds or omits, at pleasure. The > latter chapters it so entirely rewrites that the predictions are perverted, > sometimes even reversed, in scope.Dictionary of Christian Biography, article > on Theodotion. The papyrus was housed at the Chigi Library in Rome until 1922.
|
|
There are 'eighteen great tantras' () at the heart of the 'Mahayoga' () tradition, grouped into 'five root tantras' (), 'five practice tantras' (), and 'five activity tantras' (), and the 'two supplementary tantras' (). Together they are known as the Māyājāla. The Guhyagarbha Tantra () is the foremost of all of these and it abridges the content of the seventeen others.
|
|
Although the author is sometimes termed a "translator", he never makes a claim to be translating either literally or freely. Rather, he considered himself an historian who used Josephus as his main source. The work is certainly too free to be considered a translation, as he frequently paraphrases and abridges. In addition, he adds passages based on other sources.
|
|
As any layer-two based protocol, ABridges uses ARP broadcasts to obtain the link layer address associated to an IP address at the same LAN or VLAN. That is the main cause why avoiding overflooding is a matter of paramount priority; to limit this broadcast traffic, is recommended the use of distributed load ARP servers, although its use is not compulsory.
|
|
The letter would match the description of Odoacer's coup in the Anonymus Valesianus, and Romulus could have been alive in the early sixth century. But Cassiodorus does not supply any details about his correspondent or the size and nature of his pension, and Jordanes, whose history of the period abridges an earlier work by Cassiodorus, makes no mention of a pension.
|
|
Tokyopop published the novels in North America between February 10, 2009 and April 26, 2011. Cyberconnect2 also produced .hack//G.U. Trilogy, a computer animated film adaptation that abridges the story in order to appeal to players who do not have the time to play all three games. The film was first screened in Japan in a Tokyo theater in December 2007.
|
|
He wrote, In 1967, the Supreme Court reversed its earlier decisions in Golaknath v. State of Punjab. It held that Fundamental Rights included in Part III of the Constitution are given a "transcendental position" and are beyond the reach of Parliament. It also declared any amendment that "takes away or abridges" a Fundamental Right conferred by Part III as unconstitutional.
|
|
The six basic pillar edicts, which are carved on sandstone, deal mainly with the spread of moral values; Ashoka's Dhamma cover topics such as kindness, forbearance, and concern for the welfare of his people. These edicts are fairly uniform in their language and text, unlike the rock edicts, but the Delhi-Topra pillar has a long additional message. It abridges and reaffirms the content of other pillars, and to some degree those of the Major Rock Edicts also.
|
|
The 24th Amendment was effected to abrogate the Supreme Court ruling in Golaknath v. State of Punjab. The Supreme Court delivered its ruling, by a majority of 6-5 on 27 February 1967. The Court held that an amendment of the Constitution is a legislative process, and that an amendment under article 368 is "law" within the meaning of article 13 of the Constitution and therefore, if an amendment "takes away or abridges" a Fundamental Right conferred by Part III, it is void.
|
|
She asked Parashara to promise her that the coitus would be a secret and her virginity intact; the son born from their union would be as famous as the great sage; and her fragrance and youth would be eternal. Parashara granted her these wishes and was satiated by the beautiful Satyavati. After the act, the sage bathed in the river and left, never to meet her again. The Mahabharata abridges the story, noting only two wishes for Satyavati: her virgo intacta and everlasting sweet fragrance.
|
|
The declaration of fundamental rights would be meaningless unless these rights can be enforced at the instance of the persons on whom they are conferred. The Constitution itself has laid down the following provisions for the enforcement of the fundamental rights. # Any act of the executive or of the Legislature which takes away or abridges the fundamental rights shall be void and the courts are empowered to declare such act as void. (Article 13) # The Supreme Court and the High Courts are empowered to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights against any authority of the State.
|
|
Inside every island or access network a bridge is automatically elected to behave as the Root Bridge, this one bridge will behave as a gateway, allowing the forwarding of frames from the core to an island and conversely. Just one Abridge is going to perform these gateway functions, although many could be connected. Communication among 802.1D bridges and between standard 802.1D bridges and ABridges does not require point-to-point connections. The ABridge receiving an ARP frame from an island host obtains the island in which the destination is located by asking an ARP server where the host was previously registered by its island ABridge.
|
|
In Abdul Rahiman Jamaluddin v. Vithal Arjun (AIR 1958 Bombay, 94, (1957)), the Bombay High Court held that any attempt to amend the Constitution by a Legislature other than Parliament, and in a manner different from that provided for, will be void and inoperative. The Supreme Court first struck down a constitutional amendment in 1967, ruling in the case of I.C. Golak Nath and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and Anr. An amendment was struck down on the basis that it violated Article 13: "The State shall not make any law which takes away or abridges the rights conferred by [the charter of Fundamental Rights]".
|
|
There have been a number of criticisms over certain legal procedures. The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and Human Rights Watch have, for instance, argued that there exists a "trial penalty"—a penalty for electing to go to trial that arises from the significant discrepancy between the punishment a defendant would receive by waiving the right to trial and accepting a plea bargain and the punishment they might receive at trial—which they argue abridges the right to trial guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. There has also been significant criticism over the qualified immunity legal doctrine, which grants government officials—including police officers—significant immunity from civil suits. Harlow v.
|
|
There is no doubt that Haymo of Halberstadt was a prolific writer, although a number of works, particularly those of Haimo of Auxerre, have been wrongly ascribed to him. Most of his genuine works are commentaries on Holy Writ, the following of which have been printed: "In Psalmos explanatio"; "In Isaiam libri tres"; "In XII Prophetas"; "In Epistolas Pauli omnes" and "In Apocalypsim libri septem". As might be naturally expected from the exegetical methods of his day, Haymo is not an original commentator; he simply repeats or abridges the Scriptural explanations which he finds in patristic writings. As a pious monk, and a faithful observer of Rabanus's recommendations, he writes almost exclusively about the moral and mystical senses of the sacred text.
|
|
N.J. Stat. Ann. 10:5–4, 10:5–5 (2000). The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled against the Boy Scouts, saying that they violated the State's public accommodations law by revoking Dale's membership based on his homosexuality. Among other rulings, the court (1) held that application of that law did not violate the Boy Scouts' First Amendment right of expressive association because Dale's inclusion would not significantly affect members' ability to carry out their purposes; (2) determined that New Jersey has a compelling interest in eliminating the destructive consequences of discrimination from society, and that its public accommodations law abridges no more speech than is necessary to accomplish its purpose; and (3) held that Dale's reinstatement did not compel the Boy Scouts to express any message.
|
|
Article 13(2) reads, "The State shall not make any law which takes away or abridges the right conferred by this Part and any law made in contravention of this clause shall, to the extent of contravention, be void." The Court also ruled that Fundamental Rights included in Part III of the Constitution are given a "transcendental position" under the Constitution and are kept beyond the reach of Parliament. The Court also held that the scheme of the Constitution and the nature of the freedoms it granted incapacitated Parliament from modifying, restricting or impairing Fundamental Freedoms in Part III. The judgment reversed the Supreme Court's earlier decision which had upheld Parliament's power to amend all parts of the Constitution, including Part III related to Fundamental Rights.
|
|
The improved dexterity of > a workman may be considered in the same light as a machine or instrument of > trade which facilitates and abridges labor, and which, though it costs a > certain expense, repays that expense with a profit. Smith, Adam: An Inquiry > into the Nature And Causes of the Wealth of Nations Book 2 – Of the Nature, > Accumulation, and Employment of Stock; Published 1776. Therefore, Smith argued, the productive power of labor are both dependent on the division of labor: > The greatest improvement in the productive powers of labour, and the greater > part of the skill, dexterity, and judgement with which it is any where > directed, or applied, seem to have been the effects of the division of > labour. There is a complex relationship between the division of labor and human capital.
|
|
A dissenting opinion by Justice White was joined by Justices Brennan and Marshall. In the dissent, White disagreed with the Court's opinion that the statute abridges the speech rights of corporations.67 Ky. L.J. 75 (1978-1979) Corporate Political Speech: The Effect of First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti upon Statutory Limitations on Corporate Referendum Spending; Fox, Francis H. Page 83. "By holding that Massachusetts may not prohibit corporate expenditures or contributions made in connection with referenda involving issues having no material connection with the corporate business," White wrote, "the Court not only invalidates a statute which has been on the books in one form or another for many years, but also casts considerable doubt upon the constitutionality of legislation passed by some 31 States restricting corporate political activity."Bellotti, 435 U.S. at 803 (White, J., dissenting).
|
|
The majority did not agree with the view that Article 368 of the Constitution contained "power and procedure" to amend, but instead believed that the text of Article 368 only explained the procedure to amend the constitution, the power being derived from entry 97 of the List I of the VII Schedule to the Constitution. Since according to Article 13(2), the parliament could not make any law that abridges the Fundamental Rights contained in Part III of the Constitution, a constitutional amendment, also being an ordinary law within the meaning of Article 13, could not be in violation of the fundamental rights chapter contained in the Constitution of India. Therefore, all constitutional amendments thus far which were in contravention or which had made an exception to fundamental rights chapter of the Constitution were said to be void.
|
|
Ashcroft that courts should not determine that a new redistricting plan has a retrogressive effect solely because the plan decreases the number of minority- majority districts. The court emphasized that judges should analyze various other factors under the "totality of the circumstances", such as whether the redistricting plan increases the number of "influence districts" in which a minority group is large enough to influence (but not decide) election outcomes. In 2006, Congress overturned this decision by amending Section 5 to explicitly state that "diminishing the ability [of a protected minority] to elect their preferred candidates of choice denies or abridges the right to vote within the meaning of" Section 5.Voting Rights Act of 1965 § 5(b); (formerly 42 U.S.C. § 1973c(b)) Uncertainty remains as to what this language precisely means and how courts may interpret it.
|
|
In May 2007, the United States 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found in Rogers v. County of San Joaquin, No. 05-16071 that a CPS social worker who removed children from their natural parents into foster care without obtaining judicial authorization was acting without due process and without exigency (emergency conditions) violated the 14th Amendment and Title 42 United State Code Section 1983. The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution says that a state may not make a law that abridges "... the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States" and no state may "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Title 42 United States Code Section 1983 states that citizens can sue in federal courts any person who acting under a color of law to deprive the citizens of their civil rights under the pretext of a regulation of a state, See.
|
|
In May 2007, the United States 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found in ROGERS v. COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN, No. 05-16071 that a CPS social worker who removed children from their natural parents into foster care without obtaining judicial authorization, was acting without due process and without exigency (emergency conditions), and therefore violated the 14th Amendment and Title 42 United States Code Section 1983. The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution says that a state may not make a law that abridges "... the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States" and no state may "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Title 42 United States Code Section 1983 states that citizens can sue in federal courts any person that acting under a color of law to deprive the citizens of their civil rights under the pretext of a regulation of a state.
|
|