Sentence examples for assertion of government from inspiring English sources

That, at least, is the confident assertion of Government ministers, officials and diplomats in London, Dublin and Belfast as they brace themselves for the start of the "marching season," when the threat of sectarian violence in Britain's Irish province is always most acute.

I broke with the Democrats because, under President Clinton, they seemed to have abandoned their traditional support for civil liberties: Clinton's 1996 Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act was, in many ways, a more sweeping assertion of government power than Bush's Patriot Act, which was really just about plugging some holes in the Clinton legislation.

The Carolene Products Court was on solid ground in affirming that a statute that deprived constitutional challengers of the ability to demonstrate the unconstitutionality of an assertion of government power over them would itself violate the Constitution.

The proper framework for evaluating assertions of government power--the only framework that equips judges to discharge their duty of independent judgment--is judicial engagement.

But Tushnet raises a genuinely concerning possibility--the possibility that legal professionals' understanding of the rule of law that the Constitution is designed to establish might erode to the point where judges frequently uphold unlawful assertions of government power.

And there are many areas of American law today in which the rules set forth in the Constitution are simply not enforced when assertions of government power are challenged in court.

In a provocative two-part critical review of Damon Root's book, Overruled, Professor Kurt Lash argues for the latter view, making an originalist case for broad judicial deference to assertions of government power that do not implicate textually enumerated constitutional rights.

Enforcing the Constitution in concrete cases in turn requires judicial engagement--the evidence-based pursuit of the government's true ends and means, without deference to government officials' beliefs or desires, in determining whether particular assertions of government power over individuals are lawful.

They are a product of a judicial posture (often wrongly praised as "judicial restraint") that is fundamentally flawed -- one that holds that judges must generally defer to assertions of government power unless the government's actions are clearly and unambiguously unconstitutional.

Now comes Professor Greg Weiner, who in a provocative article over at the Library of Law and Liberty argues that the very notion of "rational" legislation is a "myth" and that judges have no business seeking to determine whether assertions of government power over individuals are rationally justified.

I am grateful to Cato Unbound for hosting the debate and although my disagreements with my interlocutors were substantial, I am also grateful to Professor David Strauss, Professor Barry McDonald, and Ed Whelan for challenging my argument that the next Justice should adopt a particular approach--judicial engagement--in evaluating assertions of government power.