Podcasts about Federal Constitution

In early 1788, the New England States all consider Ratification. Massachusetts, with its political leadership unenthusiastic, finds itself deeply divided and determines that the constitution needs amendments. Blog ⁠⁠⁠https://blog.AmRevPodcast.com⁠⁠⁠ includes a complete transcript, as well as more resources related to this week's episode. Book Recommendation of the Week: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠This Momentous Affair: Massachusetts and the Ratification of the Constitution of the United States, by Thomas O'Connor & Alan Rogers (borrow on archive.org) Online Recommendation of the Week: The contest over the ratification of the Federal Constitution in the State of Massachusetts: https://archive.org/details/cu31924007504552 Join American Revolution Podcast on Reddit: ⁠⁠⁠https://www.reddit.com/r/AmRevPodcast⁠⁠⁠ Ask your American Revolution Podcast questions on Quora: ⁠⁠⁠https://amrevpod.quora.com⁠⁠⁠ Join the Facebook group, American Revolution Podcast: ⁠⁠⁠https://www.facebook.com/groups/132651894048271⁠⁠⁠ Follow the podcast on X ⁠⁠⁠@AmRevPodcast⁠⁠⁠ Join the podcast mail list: ⁠⁠⁠https://mailchi.mp/d3445a9cd244/american-revolution-podcast-by-michael-troy ⁠⁠⁠ ARP T-shirts and other merch: ⁠⁠⁠https://merch.amrevpodcast.com⁠⁠⁠ Support this podcast on Patreon ⁠⁠⁠https://www.patreon.com/AmRevPodcast⁠⁠⁠ or via PayPal ⁠⁠⁠http://paypal.me/AmRevPodcast⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Have you done your assigned reading? Because Sarah Isgur and David French are joined by Judges Charles Eskridge and Brantley Starr to take us to law school. Specifically, a class on the origins of the federal constitution. The Agenda: —Why it matters —The Founders' Constitution —The Magna Carta and English Bill of Rights —The origins of “rights” —Positive vs. negative rights —The legacy of “witch hunts” —The anti-federalists —The argument against a Bill of Rights —Civic engagement Show Notes (assigned reading): —Origins Part 1 —Origins Part 2 —Origins Part 7 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Some Americans fear the Federal Constitution falls short in addressing democratic threats, yet it's long been revered for its ideals of liberty and equality. Join us at Town Hall Seattle for a discussion with Aziz Rana, Michael Hardt, and Jaleh Mansoor about Rana's book, The Constitutional Bind, exploring how this flawed document gained mythic status and its impact on society. Rana contends this reverence emerged in the 20th century alongside US global dominance, shaping both domestic and foreign policy. Discover how this cultural phenomenon has hindered meaningful change while silencing an array of movement activists — in Black, Indigenous, feminist, labor, and immigrant politics — who struggled to imagine different constitutional horizons. Gain insights into alternative constitutional futures at this thought-provoking event in collaboration with Red May. Aziz Rana is an American legal scholar and author who currently serves as Richard and Lois Cole Professor of Law at Cornell University specializing in American constitutional law. Michael Hardt teaches political theory in the Literature Program at Duke University. He is co-author, with Antonio Negri, of the Empire trilogy and, most recently, Assembly. He is co-director with Sandro Mezzadra of The Social Movements Lab. Jaleh Mansoor is an associate professor of art history at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, where she teaches modern and contemporary art history with an emphasis on Post WWII European art. Presented by Town Hall Seattle and Red May. Buy the Book The Constitutional Bind: How Americans Came to Idolize a Document That Fails Them Third Place Books  

Recently, Cameron Highlands MP and the Deputy Speaker of the Dewan Rakyat, Dato' Dr. Ramli bin Dato' Mohd Nor, proposed to place Orang Asli matters under the Federal Constitution's Concurrent List, which would give both federal and state governments legislative authority over these issues. The Malaysian Bar had some concerns about this, arguing that the federal government already has sufficient powers to address Orang Asli concerns, particularly land ownership, and that moving these matters to the Concurrent List could lead to confusion, disputes, and administrative delays. To better understand these issues, we speak to Seira Sacha Abu Bakar, the Chairperson of the Bar Council Committee on Orang Asli Rights, who will also share the challenges Orang Asli communities have faced in securing their land rights, and how development projects, such as logging, plantations, or infrastructure have impacted Orang Asli land.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Recently, Cameron Highlands MP and the Deputy Speaker of the Dewan Rakyat, Dato' Dr. Ramli bin Dato' Mohd Nor, proposed to place Orang Asli matters under the Federal Constitution's Concurrent List, which would give both federal and state governments legislative authority over these issues. The Malaysian Bar had some concerns about this, arguing that the federal government already has sufficient powers to address Orang Asli concerns, particularly land ownership, and that moving these matters to the Concurrent List could lead to confusion, disputes, and administrative delays. To better understand these issues, we speak to Seira Sacha Abu Bakar, the Chairperson of the Bar Council Committee on Orang Asli Rights, who will also share the challenges Orang Asli communities have faced in securing their land rights, and how development projects, such as logging, plantations, or infrastructure have impacted Orang Asli land.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Prime Minister's Office has just launched the Malaysia Madani Nationhood Training module to be undertaken by Akademi Kenegaraan Malaysia or AKM. The the module is firmly rooted in the Federal Constitution and reflects the core values outlined in the Rukun Negara but how useful will it be in achieving its goals of ensuring the patriotism and civic consciousness of future generations. Jason Wee, Co-founder, Architects of Diversity tells us.Image Credit: Shutterstock.com

On Monday's Mark Levin Show, the Democratic Party and their surrogates are cheering what is happening to Donald Trump because The Democratic party is the new Confederacy. This is part and parcel of their war on the Constitution, almost from day one, from a party that supported nullification, slavery, separate but equal, and Jim Crow. We have a judge and a prosecutor in New York nullifying now and will have a ripple effect on other states, which is why this is a federal issue, and the impact is nationwide. What was done to Trump in that courtroom is an attempt to nullify the Federal Constitution, due process, and equal protection. Also, the war on Israel by Biden and the Democrat party is like nothing we have ever seen before. America has never treated an ally as poorly as the Biden administration is treating Israel. Later, Anthony Fauci seemed to have memory loss at a COVID hearing today. Why are Democrats defending him? Fauci didn't know why there was a 6-foot social distancing mandate. It wasn't based on science. Finally, Mark is joined by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) about his experience with the Bush v Gore case and the Trump case being the most egregious case of election interference in our country's history, as well as the introduction of in vitro fertilization legislation. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) was set up in accordance with section 153 of the Federal Constitution to educate and empower the Bumiputera Community. To what extent has it fulfilled this role and are race-based education policies still relevant in modern Malaysia? We assess the purpose, achievements and controversies of UiTM with its 7th Vice-Chancellor, Professor Datuk Dr. Shahrin Sahib.

032124 1st HR Suzanne C Sherman State VS Federal Constitution WHAT YOU MUST KNOW by Kate Dalley

Putrajaya has agreed to amend citizenship laws enshrined in the Federal Constitution which will grant automatic citizenship to children born overseas to Malaysian mothers and non-Malaysian fathers. However, a foundling will not be eligible for automatic citizenship and would have to go through a registration process. Maalini Ramalo, Director of Social Protection, Development of Human Resources for Rural Areas explains where these amendments have failed.Image Credit: Shutterstock.com

Robyn Chambers, vice president for children's advocacy for Focus on the Family, gives our Family Life listeners and web visitors her perspective from the National March for Life in Washington, D.C. Chambers talks about the mood and strategies of the prolife movement, a year and a half after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that there is no "right" to abortion in the Federal Constitution, but as the debate moves to each state deciding on abortion.

The three-member panel at the Court of Appeal has decided that, vernacular schools in Malaysia are constitutional. And that the use of Chinese or Tamil in national-type schools is protected by Article 152 of the Federal Constitution. Firdaus Husni, Chief Human Rights Strategist, Malaysian Centre for Constitutionalism and Human Rights (MCCHR) tell us the impact of this ruling whilst also looking at other reasons why it should be permitted.Image credit: Shutterstock.com

A legal suit initiated by the Federation of Peninsular Malay Students (GPMS), the Islamic Education Development Council (Mappim), and the Confederation of Malaysian Writers Association (Gapena) states that the existence of vernacular schools goes against the provisions in the federal constitution as Article 152(1) of the Federal Constitution defines Malay as the national language. - மலேசியாவில், தமிழ் மற்றும் சீனத் தாய் மொழிப் பள்ளிகள் சட்டவிரோதமாக இயங்குகின்றன என்றும் இந்தப் பாடசாலைகளில் பயிற்று மொழியாக மலாய் பயன்படுத்தப்பட வேண்டும் என்றும் மலேசிய மேன் முறையீட்டு நீதி மன்றத்தில் தொடுக்கப்பட்ட வழக்கு தோல்வி கண்டுள்ளது.

Many state constitutional provisions are worded similarly to provisions of the federal Constitution. At times, this has led some to simply assume as binding or highly persuasive the interpretations of the latter on the former. But to what degree should interpretations of the United States Constitution inform a particular state's interpretation of its own foundational […]

Many state constitutional provisions are worded similarly to provisions of the federal Constitution. At times, this has led some to simply assume as binding or highly persuasive the interpretations of the latter on the former. But to what degree should interpretations of the United States Constitution inform a particular state's interpretation of its own foundational document? We hosted a lively discussion of this important issue by a distinguished panel:Judge David R. Stras, United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitChief Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton, United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth CircuitAssociate Justice Sarah Hawkins Warren, Georgia Supreme CourtJustice Clint Bolick, Arizona Supreme CourtModerator: Justice Sarah K. Campbell, Tennessee Supreme Court

Article 8 of Malaysia's Federal Constitution provides that all persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law, and that discrimination is prohibited based on religion, race, descent, place of birth or gender. But is this the reality in the lives of Malaysians? The results of the State of Discrimination Survey run by Architects of Diversity Malaysia found that 64% of Malaysians have experienced some form of discrimination in the past 12 months. Here to share more about the findings of that survey and how we can better address discrimination is Jason Wee, Co-founder of Architects of Diversity Malaysia. Image Credits: Shutterstock

We're set to celebrate 66 years of Merdeka on Thursday, and as the nation commemorates, we too want to remember the historic occasion, by paying tribute to our Bapa Merdeka, Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra Al-Haj, one of the prime architects of our Federal Constitution, and our Prime Minister from 1957 until September 1970, who was instrumental in gaining Malaya's freedom and sovereignty without war or bloodshed. Joining us to do this are two trustees from Yayasan Tunku Abdul Rahman (YTAR), Datin Sri Sharifah Menyalara Hussein (CEO and Founding Director of M&C Saatchi Malaysia) and Emeritus Professor Datuk Dr Hj Shad Saleem Faruqi (Holder of the Tunku Abdul Rahman Chair, University of Malaya). While we reminisce about the past and our country's journey to independence, we also look forward to the future, and wonder what it holds for our nation.Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

For the longest time, civil society groups have been urging the government to make constitutional amendments to allow Malaysian mothers with foreign spouses to confer their citizenship to their overseas-born children. As it stands, the constitution only affords that right to fathers. The push for this started to gain momentum over the past few years. Things looked to be moving in the right direction when the MADANI government was formed and amendments to the constitution were on the horizon. However, the government's proposed amendments have caused civil society groups to sound the alarm bells. NGOs have raised concern over proposed amendments to the Federal Constitution which they said would only exacerbate the issue of statelessness in the country and be detrimental to children – a classic case of one step forward, three steps back. We speak to Maalini Ramalo, Director of Social Protection, Development of Human Resources for Rural Areas (DHRRA) Malaysia. Image Credit: chokniti / 123RF

Following the amendment to the Federal Constitution to allow Malaysian mothers to confer automatic citizenship on children born overseas, equal to Malaysian fathers, we speak to Suri Kempe, President of Family Frontiers for more details over proposed amendments that could exacerbate child statelessnessImage by: Shutterstock

Mr Vince Tan from Jeeva Partnership shares his experience in litigating cases regarding Article 10 of the Federal Constitution and sheds light on his life as being a lawyer in Malaysia. #UMCT #Constilit

It's National Reconciliation Week, and we're all talking about the Voice to Parliament for First Nations Australians.There's a lot of myths swirling around about this proposed change to our Federal Constitution. So, this episode of Done by Law is about myth-busting that chatter.Tom Warne-Smith, senior lawyer at West Heidelberg Community Legal joins us to help sort out and explain a few of those misconceptions, from the law perspective.

Earlier this year, Malaysia's Cabinet took a significant step by agreeing to amend the Federal Constitution, aiming to grant automatic citizenship to children born overseas to Malaysian mothers married to foreigners. However, this announcement does not mark the finalisation of the process. There are still multiple stages that must be completed before Malaysian mothers can confer citizenship to their overseas-born children.  The proposed constitutional amendment is scheduled to be tabled in September, leaving impacted mothers anxiously hoping for recognition as equal citizens and for their children to bear the Malaysian nationality, just like them.  In this episode, we explore the broader context of citizenship rights in Malaysia, shed light on the struggles faced by the mothers, and examine the significance of achieving equality in conferring citizenship to all Malaysians, regardless of their place of birth. (Featuring guest speakers: Shamila Unnikrishnan, a Malaysian mother who has had to fight for her equal right to confer citizenship to her children born abroad and Sarah Czarina Mashanis, Programme Coordinator from Family Frontiers)  *NOTE: Views presented by the speakers are their own personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of KRYSS Network, or the organizations or institutions they are affiliated with.

Earlier this week, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department (Law and Institutional Reforms) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said, said that a comprehensive study is being done on the proposed Public Defender's Act, aimed at improving legal aid services for criminal cases in the country. Access to justice is - or should be - a fundamental right in a democratic society, but we know that in reality, there are problems of access to justice for many. On this episode of Law & Behold, we discuss the right to representation and whether it is mentioned anywhere in the Federal Constitution, while also relating this to recent developments in the country on the abolishment of the mandatory death penalty, and access to justice for those on death row. We tie all of this in with Article 5 of the Federal Constitution which states that "no person may be deprived of life or personal liberty except in accordance with law."Helping us to unpack all of this are Firdaus Husni (Chief Human Rights Strategist, Malaysian Centre for Constitutionalism and Human Rights (MCCHR), and Abdul Rashid Ismail (Lawyer, and Former President, National Human Rights Society of Malaysia (HAKAM).Image Credit: Shutterstock

Just last month, the Federal Court delivered its decision on the Taman Rimba Kiara case, where the panel of judges unanimously decided that the development order obtained in 2017 by the joint venture of Yayasan Wilayah Persekutuan and Developer Memang Perkasa Sdn Bhd for the Taman Rimba Kiara project was null and void. This decision is a landmark victory for all those who fought to preserve Taman Rimba Kiara, a much loved public space and green lung in the Klang Valley. We discuss the outcome of the legal case and how the landmark ruling will impact other public litigation cases in the country with two lawyers - Abraham Au, a Constitutional Lawyer with Messers G.S. Nijar, who appeared for the residents, and Kiu Jia Yaw, the Co-Deputy Chair of the Bar Council Environment & Climate Change Committee and the co-chair of the Malaysian CSO-SDG Alliance. On a broader scale, taking into account that Malaysia does not have an explicit recognition of environmental rights in our Constitution, we also discuss whether we should push for an amendment of our Federal Constitution to expressly recognise access to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, as a fundamental right.Image Credit: Facebook

Article 8 of the Federal Constitution covers the principle of equality and non-discrimination in Malaysia, but to what extent does this apply to the rights of persons with disabilities? In fact, activists and advocates have long called for legal reforms to both the constitution and the Persons with Disabilities Act 2008, to better uphold and protect the rights of persons with disabilities. Here to share more about what that could look like, are Anit Kaur Randhawa and Meera Samanther, both lawyers and members of the Harapan OKU Law Reform Group.Image Credit: Shutterstock

https://www.solgood.org - View our full collection of audiobooks, short stories, & sounds for sleep at our website

https://www.solgood.org - View our full collection of audiobooks, short stories, & sounds for sleep at our website

https://www.solgood.org - View our full collection of audiobooks, short stories, & sounds for sleep at our website

https://www.solgood.org - View our full collection of audiobooks, short stories, & sounds for sleep at our website

https://www.solgood.org - View our full collection of audiobooks, short stories, & sounds for sleep at our website

There is no explicit provision within the Federal Constitution which addresses the issue of whom the King should appoint as prime minister, should there be a hung Parliament. What convention then governs a hung Parliament situation that Malaysia is currently facing? On a state level, we've seen a unity government being formed in Perak, with Pakatan Harapan and Barisan Nasional coming together to form the new state government. Will we see a unity government at the Federal level, and what role does the Yang di-Pertuan Agong play in determining these sorts of solutions to the many post GE15 political issues? We discuss this and more with Kee Hui Yee, a lawyer with Kanesalingam and Co.Image Credit: Shutterstock

With Istana Negara having extended the deadline for the main coalitions to present their respective numbers and candidates for Prime Minister by 22 November, we explore what are the obligations of the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong, as spelled out in the Federal Constitution, when faced with a hung Parliament. Constitutional lawyer New Sin Yew joins us to explain, and also clarifies what the Federal Constitution says about the role of the monarchy in appointing a Prime Minister. Image Credit: iStock and Shutterstock

With no single coalition able to win enough seats to form the government, Istana Negara instructed coalition and party leaders to notify the Dewan Rakyat Speaker of their numbers to form a new government and respective PM candidates by 2pm today. The Federal Constitution states the King has the discretion to appoint as prime minister the person he feels is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Dewan Rakyat and can act at his discretion. But what is the process from here on and what does the law or convention tell us? For answers we speak to Dato' Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, Constitutional Lawyer.Image credit: 123rf

For GE15, 3 major coalitions are fighting to run the country, with a crowded field of 945 candidates contesting in 222 parliamentary seats. All of which makes the outcome harder to predict, thus raising the prospect of a hung parliament after every vote has been counted. New Sin Yew, Constitutional Lawyer, tells us what the Federal Constitution does say or doesn't say about such a situation.Image credit: Shutterstock

Article 10 of the Constitution of Malaysia guarantees Malaysian citizens the right to freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of association. On this episode of Law & Behold, we tackle Freedom of Association in particular, with Firdaus Husni, the Chief Human Rights Strategist at the Malaysian Centre for Constitutionalism and Human Rights (MCCHR) and Kee Hui Yee, a lawyer with Kanesalingam & Co. Freedom of association is a fundamental liberty guaranteed to every citizen under Article 10(1)(c) of the Federal Constitution, and the same rights are enjoyed under Article 20(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Why do discussions on anti-hopping laws inevitably involve arguments about freedom of association, and how is the Societies Act 1966 inconsistent with the principles of human rights, particularly the right to freedom of association? We discuss this and more with Firdaus and Hui Yee.Law & Behold is a monthly series which aims to arm Malaysians with constitutional literacy, and is done in collaboration with The Malaysian Bar, the University of Malaya's Faculty of Law, and the Malaysian Centre for Constitutionalism and Human Rights (MCCHR).

Article 10 of the Constitution of Malaysia guarantees Malaysian citizens the right to freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of association. On this episode of Law & Behold, we tackle Freedom of Association in particular, with Firdaus Husni, the Chief Human Rights Strategist at the Malaysian Centre for Constitutionalism and Human Rights (MCCHR) and Kee Hui Yee, a lawyer with Kanesalingam & Co. Freedom of association is a fundamental liberty guaranteed to every citizen under Article 10(1)(c) of the Federal Constitution, and the same rights are enjoyed under Article 20(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Why do discussions on anti-hopping laws inevitably involve arguments about freedom of association, and how is the Societies Act 1966 inconsistent with the principles of human rights, particularly the right to freedom of association? We discuss this and more with Firdaus and Hui Yee.Law & Behold is a monthly series which aims to arm Malaysians with constitutional literacy, and is done in collaboration with The Malaysian Bar, the University of Malaya's Faculty of Law, and the Malaysian Centre for Constitutionalism and Human Rights (MCCHR).

This month, in recognition of the upcoming Constitution Day, celebrated on September 17 every year, I sat down with Justice Dana Oxley to discuss the difference between the Iowa Constitution and Federal Constitution. Host: Marissa GaalGuest: Iowa Supreme Court Justice Dana OxleyMusic from The Epic 2  by Rafael Krux Link: https://filmmusic.io/song/5384-the-epic-2- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

One cannot think of Malaysia's independence day, without thinking of the late Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra Al-Haj, Malaya's first Prime Minister. Ahead of our 65th independence day, we reflect on the role Tunku played in securing our nation's independence, and also look at the role the Merdeka Constitution played in shaping the nation's new path as an independent nation. Joining us to do this are Emeritus Professor Datuk Dr Hj Shad Saleem Faruqi, Holder of the Tunku Abdul Rahman Chair at the University of Malaya and a trustee of Yayasan Tunku Abdul Rahman (YTAR), Johan Rozali-Wathooth, also a trustee YTAR, and Ida Thien, the Deputy CEO of YTAR. The trio also share how Yayasan Tunku Abdul Rahman is preserving Tunku's legacy through its programmes and initiatives.Image credit: Wikimedia Commons

One cannot think of Malaysia's independence day, without thinking of the late Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra Al-Haj, Malaya's first Prime Minister. Ahead of our 65th independence day, we reflect on the role Tunku played in securing our nation's independence, and also look at the role the Merdeka Constitution played in shaping the nation's new path as an independent nation. Joining us to do this are Emeritus Professor Datuk Dr Hj Shad Saleem Faruqi, Holder of the Tunku Abdul Rahman Chair at the University of Malaya and a trustee of Yayasan Tunku Abdul Rahman (YTAR), Johan Rozali-Wathooth, also a trustee YTAR, and Ida Thien, the Deputy CEO of YTAR. The trio also share how Yayasan Tunku Abdul Rahman is preserving Tunku's legacy through its programmes and initiatives.Image credit: Wikimedia Commons

Federal Constitution or State Statutes & CodesViolation of your federal constitutional rights can cause reversable errors that can affect your child support case. Challenge Child Support Agency with Case Laws from Federal Or State.Constitution – “We The People” – affirm that the government of the United States exists to serve its citizens. The first ten amendments constitute the Bill of Rights.Violation of a your federal constitutional rights can cause reversable errors that can affect your child support case. Please click on the link to Schedule a Discussion:

Article 8 (1) of the Federal Constitution reads: All persons are equal before the law and entitled to equal protection of the law. The law implies that every person is equally subject to the law, regardless of their social, political or economical status. While equality is not defined, it has been the subject of interpretation. We discuss equality before the law, especially with regard to intersectionality, poverty and human rights, with Emeritus Professor Datuk Dr Hj Shad Saleem Faruqi, Holder of the Tunku Abdul Rahman Chair, University of Malaya, and Firdaus Husni, Chief Human Rights Strategist, Malaysian Centre for Constitutionalism and Human Rights (MCCHR). Law & Behold, is a monthly series which aims to arm Malaysians with constitutional literacy, and is done in collaboration with The Malaysian Bar, the University of Malaya's Faculty of Law, and the Malaysian Centre for Constitutionalism and Human Rights (MCCHR).Image credit: Shutterstock

Law & Behold is a monthly series which aims to arm Malaysians with constitutional literacy, and is done in collaboration with The Malaysian Bar, the University of Malaya's Faculty of Law, and the Malaysian Centre for Constitutionalism and Human Rights (MCCHR). This month, we speak to lawyers Larissa Ann Louis (Hakita) and Simon Siah (Lawyer Kamek for Change), who are both actively working to resolve issues on statelessness in Malaysia. Who are considered stateless in Malaysia, and what rights are denied to them? What legal safeguards are there in the Federal Constitution against statelessness, and how can someone who has been deemed stateless through no fault of their own - especially children - attempt to obtain Malaysian citizenship? We discuss what law and policy reforms on citizenship are needed, so that we can address the endless cycle of statelessness in Malaysia.Image credit: Reggie Lee/Shutterstock.com

Last on Law & Behold, we discussed federalism in Malaysia, with a special focus on Peninsula Malaysia. This month, we continue that discussion and shift our focus to Sabah and Sarawak, to discuss if this system of federal governance has worked in East Malaysia, and also what the amendment to the Federal Constitution in 2022 - to recognize the special rights of Sabah and Sarawak - has achieved thus far. Joining us for this discussion are Emeritus Professor Datuk Dr Hj Shad Saleem Faruqi (Holder of the Tunku Abdul Rahman Chair, University of Malaya) and Roger Chin (President, Sabah Law Society). Law & Behold is a monthly series which aims to arm Malaysians with constitutional literacy, and is done in collaboration with The Malaysian Bar, the University of Malaya's Faculty of Law, and the Malaysian Centre for Constitutionalism and Human Rights (MCCHR).Image credit: Roger Chin/LinkedIn, Suruhanjaya Pelantikan Kehakiman

On this episode of Law & Behold, we tackle two Constitution fundamentals: Constitutional Supremacy, and also Separation of Powers, Checks and Balances. What does it mean that the Constitution stands as the supreme law of the land? How does the Federal Constitution provide for the separation of powers, namely through the three branches of the Executive, the Federal Legislative and the Judiciary? Firdaus Husni (Chief Human Rights Strategist, Malaysian Centre for Constitutionalism and Human Rights (MCCHR) and Kee Hui Yee (lawyer, Kanesalingam & Co) join us to answer these questions and more. Law & Behold, is a monthly series which aims to arm Malaysians with constitutional literacy, and is done in collaboration with The Malaysian Bar, the University of Malaya's Faculty of Law, and the Malaysian Centre for Constitutionalism and Human Rights (MCCHR).Image credit: Shutterstock

Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra al-Haj was born on the 8th of February 1903. Today, on the 119th anniversary of his birth, we speak to his granddaughter, Datin Sri Sharifah Menyalara Hussein, who is also the CEO and Founding Director of M&C Saatchi Malaysia, about Tunku's legacy, and her memories of growing up with him. Also joining us is Emeritus Professor Datuk Dr Hj Shad Saleem Faruqi, Holder of the Tunku Abdul Rahman Chair at the University of Malaya, about Tunku's role in the formation of Malaysia and the shaping of the Federal Constitution. Both Datin Lara and Prof Shad are also trustees of Yayasan Tunku Abdul Rahman (YTAR), and they will also share how the foundation is preserving Tunku's legacy, and helping to forge the next generation of leaders in Malaysia.Image credit: Picryl

The history of Malaya's emergence as a sovereign independent nation after centuries of colonial domination, is a story with such a wealth of perspectives, that it can be told and retold in many ways. So believes Emeritus Professor Datuk Dr Hj Shad Saleem Faruqi, Holder of the Tunku Abdul Rahman Chair at the University of Malaya, our guest on today's episode of Law & Behold. He joins us to discuss the history of the formation of our Constitution, some of the alterations that have been made to the document since 1957, and why constitutional literacy is a must, for every Malaysian. Law & Behold is a monthly series which aims to arm Malaysians with constitutional literacy, and is done in collaboration with The Malaysian Bar, the University of Malaya's Faculty of Law, and the Malaysian Centre for Constitutionalism and Human Rights (MCCHR).Image credit: Wikimedia Commons

Texans can claim an impressive list of things to brag about—what we call braggin' rights. Things like the biggest, the first, the only, etc. . . Let's take a look at six things for which Texans rightly brag. • Brag #1 Texas is the first (and only) state to be an independent nation before becoming a state. From 1836 until 1846, when the actual transfer of governance took place, Texas was a Republic with Sam Houston as its president. Texas is also the only state to enter the United States by treaty instead of by territorial annexation. As part of the annexation agreement, Texas negotiated the right to fly its flag at the same height as the US Stars and Stripes. In addition, the 1845 joint congressional resolution admitting Texas to the US allows for the state to break itself up into a total of five states should it choose to do so. The actual language in the document says, “New states of convenient size—not exceeding four in number, in addition to said state of Texas—and having sufficient population, may hereafter by the consent of said state, be formed out of the territory thereof, which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions of the Federal Constitution.” In plain language this provision makes Texas the only state that can divide itself into a total of five new states without anyone's permission and the US would have to accept the states as part of the US.

The half century extending from the imperial crisis between Britain and its colonies in the 1760s to the early decades of the new republic of the United States was the greatest and most creative era of constitutionalism in American history, and perhaps in the world. During these decades, Americans explored and debated all aspects of politics and constitutionalism--the nature of power, liberty, representation, rights, the division of authority between different spheres of government, sovereignty, judicial authority, and written constitutions. The results of these issues produced institutions that have lasted for over two centuries.In this new book, eminent historian Gordon S. Wood distills a lifetime of work on constitutional innovations during the Revolutionary era. In concise form, he illuminates critical events in the nation's founding, ranging from the imperial debate that led to the Declaration of Independence to the revolutionary state constitution making in 1776 and the creation of the Federal Constitution in 1787. Among other topics, he discusses slavery and constitutionalism, the emergence of the judiciary as one of the major tripartite institutions of government, the demarcation between public and private, and the formation of states' rights.Here is an immensely readable synthesis of the key era in the making of the history of the United States, presenting timely insights on the Constitution and the nation's foundational legal and political documents.-Gordon S. Wood is the Alva O. Way University Professor and Professor of History Emeritus at Brown University. He is the author of many books, including The Creation of the American Republic, 1776-1787, which won the Bancroft Prize and the John H. Dunning Prize of the American Historical Association; The Radicalism of the American Revolution, which won the Pulitzer Prize for History and the Ralph Waldo Emerson Prize; The American Revolution: A History; The Americanization of Benjamin Franklin; Revolutionary Characters: What Made the Founders Different, which was a New York Times bestseller; Empire of Liberty: A History of the Early Republic, 1789-1815 (OUP, 2009), which was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize and winner of the American History Book Prize from the New-York Historical Society; and Friends Divided: John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. He is a regular reviewer for the New York Review of Books.

The word “impeachment” is in the air these days. Wouldn't it be nice if we had a website to find information about what the Constitution's framers thought about impeachment or any other Constitutional issue. Well, The Constitutional Sources Project is the place for you. The project, called ConSource for short, is a Washington, D.C.-based initiative to digitize and transcribe the documents that shaped the Federal Constitution, and increase our historical literacy. On today's episode, you'll hear from Julie Silverbrook, ConSource's executive director. Julie is an attorney and she is leading the charge to help us all better understand our constitutional past. If you'd like to support this podcast as well as new research into George Washington and his world, please consider becoming a Mount Vernon Member.  About Our Guest: Julie Silverbrook is Executive Director of The Constitutional Sources Project, a non-partisan, not-for-profit organization devoted to increasing understanding, facilitating research, and encouraging discussion of the US Constitution by connecting individuals with the documentary history of its creation, ratification, and amendment. Silverbrook holds a J.D. from the William & Mary Law School, where she received the National Association of Women Lawyers Award and the Thurgood Marshall Award and served as a Senior Articles Editor on the William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal. About Our Host: Jim Ambuske, Ph.D. leads the Center for Digital History at the Washington Library. A historian of the American Revolution, Scotland, and the British Atlantic World, Ambuske graduated from the University of Virginia in 2016. He is a former Farmer Postdoctoral Fellow in Digital Humanities at the University of Virginia Law Library. At UVA Law, Ambuske co-directed the 1828 Catalogue Project and the Scottish Court of Session Project.  He is currently at work on a book about emigration from Scotland in the era of the American Revolution as well as a chapter on Scottish loyalism during the American Revolution for a volume to be published by the University of Edinburgh Press.

On September 9, 2015, A. E. Dick Howard will deliver a Banner Lecture entitled "Magna Carta: 800 Years since Runnymede." A. E. Dick HowardIn 2015 people on both sides of the Atlantic will mark the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta. On June 15, 1215, at Runnymede, a reluctant King John agreed to the barons' terms in a document which came to be known as Magna Carta. Though the king never meant to keep his promises, Magna Carta survived. Down through the centuries, it has been a symbol of opposition to arbitrary government. Magna Carta came to America with the English colonies' first charters. In the years leading up to the Revolution, Americans framed their arguments against British policies by drawing upon the language of the early charters and upon Magna Carta as their birthright. Having declared independence, Americans turned to writing and implementing state constitutions and, ultimately, a Federal Constitution. Magna Carta left an indelible mark on these developments. At the core of this legacy is the rule of law—the thesis that no one, including those in government, is above the law. Another principle traceable to the Great Charter is constitutional supremacy—the idea of a superstatute against which ordinary laws are to be measured. Constitutional provisions guaranteeing due process of law derive directly from Magna Carta's assurance of proceedings according to the "law of the land." And the uses successive generations, in England and America, have made of the Charter have given us the idea of an organic, evolving Constitution, one that can be adapted to the needs and challenges of our own time. A. E. Dick Howard is the White Burkett Miller Professor of Law and Public Affairs at the University of Virginia. A Rhodes Scholar at Oxford University, he was a law clerk to Justice Hugo L. Black of the Supreme Court of the United States. A member of High Table at Christ Church, Oxford, Professor Howard has written extensively on constitutional law and history, including The Road from Runnymede: Magna Carta and Constitutionalism in America. Recently the University of Virginia conferred on him its Thomas Jefferson Award—the highest honor the University accords a member of the faculty. The content and opinions expressed in these presentations are solely those of the speaker and not necessarily of the Virginia Museum of History & Culture.