Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

6

They were referring to the unwritten constitution of the British Empire. Magna Carta was only a part of that. Without commenting on its legality, validity or morality, the argument was that Parliament could not extract money from the colonies without their consent. The constitutional principle involved being, of course, that of taxation without ...


3

Short Answer: No, the colonists were not referring to a specific document. The colonists were referring to the fact that they believed it was beyond the powers of Parliament to tax them because the colonists did not have representation in Parliament. Long Answer: The American colonists were not referring to a specific document like the Magna Carta, or any ...


2

My first thought was that the legislative session for each one of these states ended right before July 1, however, a look at the National Conference of State Legislature's website showed that the legislature in each state adjourns at a different time, although these times could have been different in the late 60s. What appears most likely is that during the ...


2

The events were written down by Ibn Ishaq, who unusually for historians of this time actually would write down who his sources were. From New Light on the Story of Banu Qurayza and the Jews of Medina by W. N. Arafat, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, (1976), pp. 100-107: Ibn Ishaq sets out his direct sources as he opens ...


2

2001-2008 was not a time of rebellion and danger of public health and safety. The arguments of the court can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boumediene_v._Bush#Opinion_of_the_Court He was not acquitted of his charges, as he was never charged with anything. (That's the whole point, if he had been arrested and charged with something, his habeas ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible