The phrase "affirmative right" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used in discussions about legal rights, particularly those that require action or provision by the state or society.
Example: "The right to education is often considered an affirmative right, as it obligates the government to provide access to schooling for all children."
Alternatives: "positive right" or "entitlement right".
The Constitution contains no affirmative right to vote.
The language which the Court so carefully excises from those opinions relates, not to an affirmative right of self-representation, but to the consequences of waiver.
Contrary to popular belief, although the Constitution prohibits discrimination in voting based on race, gender and age, it does not explicitly provide Americans with an affirmative right to vote.
"What's happened since then is that the Supreme Court did its best to get rid of the affirmative right to vote," Glass explained, in a reference to the Court's recent decision in Shelby County v. Holder.
It contends that these procedural rules did not create an affirmative right to two lawyers, so that Boyer could have forgone the second lawyer at any time and gone to trial if he had so desired.
The act of congress did not assume to give any corporation, company, or person the affirmative right to transport from one state to another state cattle that were liable to impart or capable of communicating contagious, infectious, or communicable diseases.
Laurence H. Tribe, Unraveling National League of Cities: the New Federalism and Affirmative Rights to Essential Government Services, 90 Harv.
In most states, it is usually a crime to abuse animals, and the legal right to be free from abuse often includes affirmative rights, including the right to adequate food and shelter.
Under this view, "National League of Cities" emerges not as another example of the Court's general move to restrict personal rights, but rather as a step reflecting an underlying recognition of affirmative rights in a just constitutional order.
Democrats and Republicans alike appear encouragingly ready to enshrine affirmative rights for consumers, including the right to access the data a company has on them, the right to correct it, the right to delete it and the right to move it from one firm to another.
Right now, almost all the discussion of our meritocracy's vices assumes the system's basic post-WASP premises, and hopes that either more inclusion (the pro-diversity left's fixation) or a greater emphasis on academic merit (the anti-affirmative right's hobbyhorse) will cure our establishment's all-too-apparent ills.
