Category: Political Science

So for my final exam for my class Pol 301 CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS, I have to write an Argumentative Essay. ALL my intructions are in the Final Exam Intructions PDF below, including the Essay Question.
I already had to do a Outline for the Final. So please take a look at my outline and also take a look at the Prrofessor’s Feedback Analysis in regards to my outline and how he wannts the essay to be. 
We are to reference the notes from certain classes which I will attach below as attachmentss. Bu keep in mind this essay is more to assess our own opinion in answering the question so we o not need to break down each little if you know what i mean.  
***Class 19 – April 2 – Thirteenth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment: Incorporation. (Important) 
Class 25 – May 2 – Fourth Amendment Search and Seizure 
Class 27 – May 9 – Legal System Definition of Crime 
_______________________________________________________________

Rewrite the essay attached, so that it fits into the word limits and isn’t flagged as AI, but at the same time maintaining all information written. 
Do not change the context, just rewrite and make sure that the end of each point leads back to the essay title.

PLEASE JUST FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS AND DO NOT USE ANY OTHER RESEARCH APART FROM THE ONE I HAVE PROVIDED. 

“Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Foreign_ Sovereign_ Immunities_Act.
Reading response questions: Answer one question. Please copy the question to your answer sheet.
(1) A number of other states, including Australia, Canada, South Africa, and the United Kingdom, have codified the restrictive theory of sovereign immunity. However, the shift from the absolute to the restrictive theory of immunity is hardly universal; China, India, Indonesia, and Russia, among others, still adhere to the absolute theory of immunity. What factors might prompt states to adopt the restrictive theory?
(2) What justification does the ICJ give for privileging Germany’s sovereign immunity over Italy’s ability to exercise jurisdiction over acts on Italian soil? What normative principle supports the finding that Germany’s sovereign immunity should take precedence over the right of Italian citizens to recover for widespread violations of core international legal norms? Note that, in analyzing the customary international law of sovereign immunity, the Court observed:
“the rule of State immunity occupies an important place in international law and international relations. It derives from the principle of sovereign equality of States, which, as Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Charter of the United Nations makes clear, is one of the fundamental principles of the international legal order. This principle has to be viewed together with the principle that each State possesses sovereignty over its own territory and that there flows from that sovereignty the jurisdiction of the State over events and persons within that territory. Exceptions to the immunity of the State represent a departure from the principle of sovereign equality. Immunity may represent a departure from the principle of territorial sovereignty and the jurisdiction which flows from it.”
(3) Are you persuaded by the Court’s statement that permitting an exception to sovereign immunity for serious violations of human rights law would require a court “to hold an enquiry into the merits in order to determine whether it had jurisdiction”? If so, does the same argument apply to permitting a commercial activity exception to sovereign immunity?
(4) Sovereign debt restructuring is a recurrent issue and repeatedly reveals the need for an organized restructuring process. Some observers propose the addition of clauses permitting a super-majority of bondholders approve a debtor’s restructuring proposal. This approval would bind all bondholders, eliminating the possibility of hold-outs. Others propose creation of a treaty-based international bankruptcy regime, which would permit states to discharge their debts. As among contract, treaty, or politics, which do you think is the best approach to the problem of sovereign debt restructuring?
(5) Can the judgments of the ICJ and the Italian Constitutional Court be harmonized? Can you justify judicial outcomes finding that international jus cogens norms cannot displace international legal immunities from jurisdiction, but fundamental constitutional rights can?
(6) Take one of the notable cases from this link and answer the question: why did the doctrine of state immunity prevail or fail in the finnal judgement? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Sovereign_Immunities_Act.

Case study 
** read articles then compare and contrast 
* need 3 references (2 scholarly articles and 1 from the book) 
in depth details sent via attachment 

Choosen essay question: Why have some cities chosen to be “sanctuary cities”? and “why hasn’t NYC been able to manage the recent influx of migrants into the city?”. 
Try and focus on NYC and California. This essay must be unbiased and be informational. Attched below are some possible sources, all sources inclused must be educational and peer reviewed. 

This assignment will require you to write an essay with at least 5 full pages All detailed requirements are in the file uploaded. Please do read through the requirements

Extending suffrage has been a multi-generational endeavor throughout the history of the United States.
1) Consider the following timeline which shows the changes to the American electorate over time.
1865 – The 13th Amendment was added to the U.S. Constitution, abolishing slavery and involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for a crime.
1868 – The 14th Amendment was added to the U.S. Constitution. It granted citizenship to all people “born or naturalized in the United States,” and gave all citizens equal protection under the law.
1870 – The 15th Amendment was added to the U.S. Constitution, determining that a citizen’s right to vote could not be denied or diminished because of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
1877 – The end of Reconstruction. From 1877 through the mid-20th century, new state laws and amendments to state constitutions ushered in a system of racial segregation and the near-complete disenfranchisement of Black voters in the South.
1882 – The Chinese Exclusion Act denied people of Chinese ancestry from the right to citizenship and suffrage.
1884 – The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Elk v. Wilkins that Indigenous peoples did not have equal protection under the law and, therefore, did not have the right to vote.
1890 – Individual states started extending suffrage to include women in state and local, not federal, elections.
1920 – The 19th Amendment was added to the U.S. Constitution, extending suffrage to include all women in all elections. However, de facto and de jure  racial discrimination limited the voting rights of women of color.
1922 – The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Ozawa v. United States that people of Japanese ancestry were ineligible for citizenship.
1923 – The U.S. Supreme Court similarly ruled in Thind v. United States that Indians were ineligible for citizenship.
1924 – The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 extended citizenship to all Indigenous peoples, although it took over 40 years for all states to comply and extend suffrage.
1952 – The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 extended the right to citizenship and suffrage to all people of Asian ancestry.
1961 – The 23rd Amendment was added to the U.S. Constitution, extending suffrage to include citizens of Washington, DC.
1964 – The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed. Title 1 of the Act specifically guaranteed equal voting rights and eliminated many restrictive voting requirements and procedures.
1964 – The 24th Amendment was added to the U.S. Constitution, abolishing poll taxes in federal elections. Two years later, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Harper vs. Virginia Board of Elections that poll taxes were also unconstitutional in state and local elections.
1965 – The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was passed, becoming the most significant effort to protect voting rights in the history of the U.S.
1971 – The 26th Amendment was added to the U.S. Constitution, extending suffrage to include 18 to 20-year-olds.
1993 – The National Voter Registration Act increased access to voter registration by requiring the Department of Motor Vehicles, public assistance facilities, and disabilities agencies to make voter registration readily available.
2013 – The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Shelby County v. Holder eliminated Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, dismantling federal pre-clearance requirements and allowing states that had previously needed to seek approval from the federal government to change voting laws and procedures, to do so by themselves.
2023 – The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Allen v. Milligan that Alabama’s redistricting process was racially discriminatory, upholding Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
2) Answer the following questions:
Question to Answer: Which events along this timeline do you consider to be the most significant in altering the American electorate (both positive and negative)? Discuss why you think each is significant? make sure to use the word terminate at least 3 times in your responses
3) Head over to Pew ResearchLinks to an external site.. Read through the page and consider voter turnout, 2018-2022, and how it manifests across demographics.
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/07/12/voter-turnout-2018-2022/
4) Answer the following questions:
Question to Answer: Using data from this source, report back which groups are likely to turnout and those which are not. make sure to use the word terminate at least 3 times in your responses
Question to Answer: Amongst the groups that turnout vs those that don’t, what do you think is going on here in terms of their overall levels of turnout by group, discuss your answer?

arvard
Job Requirements / Instructions for writers
The European course of the Western Balkans: a critical overview of the enlargement process.
Scope of work: 2,000 words, (+) (-) 500 words. Bibliography not included.
include at least 7 references
The tutor must provide a pdf ai plagiarism report from turnitn of the paper given

Answer TWO questions only
Two essays (each presenting its bibliography), about 1000 words each
(750-1250), 2000 words overall (70%)
The increasing institutional power of the European Parliament is the most
significant recent institutional change in the EU. Discuss.
What arguments would you propose to support the argument that there is
no democratic deficit in the EU? Discuss.
Is Brexit a cause or consequence of the alleged democratic deficit of the
EU? Discuss.
How important were the crises of the 1960s and the role of Charles de
Gaulle in shaping the future of the European Community?
According to neo-functionalist theory, what role do supranational
institutions play in the European integration process?
How convincing are intergovernmentalist accounts of European
integration?
Would you agree with the statement that comparative politics provides a
better disciplinary homeland for EU studies than international relations or
law studies?
What do the EU’s foreign, security, and defence policies and structures tell
us about the EU as a political actor?
To what extent has the EU been characterized structurally by a complex
mix of supranationalism, intergovernmentalism, and differentiated forms
of integration?
Is there only one way of making European policy? And why? Discuss.