The phrase "asserted under the" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used in legal or formal contexts to indicate that something is claimed or stated within a specific framework or authority.
Example: "The rights were asserted under the provisions of the contract."
Alternatives: "claimed under the" or "declared under the".
"(1) Omissions in legal proceedings to assert what would naturally have been asserted under the circumstances.
Whatever petitioner's rights are, there can be no doubt they matured and were asserted under the 1955 directive.
§§ 1979 and 629(16), or § 563(12), because those provisions dealt only with 'civil rights' claims, whether asserted under the Federal Constitution or federal statutes.
The third factor asks whether the secondary use employs more of the copyrighted work than is necessary, and whether the copying was excessive in relation to any valid purposes asserted under the first factor.
The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to such claims as may be asserted under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by third party complaint, cross-claim, or counterclaim.
The plaintiffs request "a federal injunction, based on rights asserted under the United States constitution's first, second and 14th amendments, against having the state compel that their classrooms be the locus of implementation of the overly solicitous, dangerously experimental gun policies of the Texas legislature and the insufficiently protective policies of UT-Austin's president".
The only economic rights the respondent can assert under the Act are those rights that he has retained.
Naturally this will be after they become part of an accepted license, and after some right, privilege, immunity or duty asserted under them becomes the subject of actual controversy.
It sweeps through the "exclusive economic zones" asserted under UNCLOS by Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam.
3. May the claim in this case be asserted under Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed.
In both cases, the right asserted arose under the equal protection, not the privileges and immunities clause; in both the gist of the cause of action was not damage or injury to property, but unconstitutional infringement of a right of personal liberty not susceptible of valuation in money.
