Suchergebnisse

"Most laws are predictable: don't steal, don't kill, don't go somewhere you don't belong. But what about the wackiest and weirdest laws? [This book] is a tribute to the strangest rules on the books. Consider: sending a surprise pizza to someone in Louisiana can result in a $500 fine; at times, it has been illegal to scare the queen in Canada; if you participate in a frog-jumping contest in Angels Camp, California, and your frog dies, you are not allowed to eat it; [and] it's against the law to harm a sasquatch in Skamania, Washington. Discover all the strange and unusual laws you might not even know you're breaking!" -- Back cover

Latest issue consulted: Vol. 8 (July 1998-May 2000) ; Decisions and orders of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer of the U.S. Dept. of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review. ; Title varies slightly: v. 4- , Administrative decisions under employer sanctions, unfair immigration-related employment practices, and civil penalty document fraud laws of the United States. ; Also designated Reference no. 399 to 591- ; Mode of access: Internet. ; Cumulative topical index: v. 1 (Mar. 1988)-8 (May 2000). 1 v. (Includes index to the publication under its earlier title). ; Each vol. includes cumulative alphabetical listing of cases from v. 1. ; Permanent vols. for: 8 USC 1324 . proceeding.

AbstractNazi Germany's Nuremberg Laws of 1935 generated legal commentary by Nazi jurists who eagerly extended its antisemitic principles—but not by Jewish lawyers, for whom the discrimination was too blatant and the risks of public criticism too dangerous. In the winter of 1936-37 in Leipzig, however, one obscure lawyer named Max Hellmann made an incisive commentary about the laws. Faced with prosecution for employing a female "Aryan" cook, Hellmann, a convert and widower in despair, responded boldly: he subpoenaed Adolf Hitler to testify and even moved to imprison him pending the judge's decision. His defense was, in fact, a satire. It mocked the so-called Führerprinzip (leadership principle), i.e., the idea of law as the Führer's will, at the heart of the Nazi legal system. Persistently contrasting the need for legal procedures with the primacy of irrational will, Hellmann showed that the leadership principle was incoherent with regard to the separation of powers, the role of the judiciary, the process of legislation, and the very nature of law itself. He provided a detailed critique of Nazi law that insiders, such as Nazi jurists, dared not think, and that outsiders, such as Jewish lawyers, had no reason to develop.

Administrative liability, as a type of legal coercion, is important for maintaining law and order, protection of an individual, protection of human rights and freedoms, performance of tasks and functions of the state. The description of administrative liability, given in the article, is connected with its inherent features and peculiarities of an administrative offense (misdemeanour). The most significant attention is paid to the issue, connected with public danger of an illegal act, taking into account the conceptual changes in criminal legislation, and, thus, criminal liability and as a consequence of administrative liability. The concept of reforming the Criminal Legislation provides for the preparation in addition to the Criminal Code of Ukraine, the Code (Law) on Criminal Offenses (misdemeanours) and the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses. Taking into account the emergence of the phenomenon of "criminal misdemeanours" in the legislation of Ukraine, for committing of which there is criminal liability before the court (the judge), the author raises the question of defining such criminal offense as a socially dangerous act, but of less public danger than a crime, and all other misdemeanours (administrative) should be considered harmful, but not socially dangerous. Cases of such misdemeanours should be considered during administrative proceedings, according to the (procedural) rules defined in the Code on Administrative Offenses. Using the experience of legal regulation of European countries, we thus implement our legislation to the European one, but taking into account our national traditions and maintaining the fundamental principles of criminal law and maintaining such principles regarding administrative liability. So, criminal liability arises only in accordance with the Criminal Code of Ukraine and the Code (Law) on Criminal Offenses (misdemeanours) as socially dangerous acts, and administrative liability arises in accordance with the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses (misdemeanours) that ...