the-french-artist/wikipedia_20220301.simple_sentence_embeddings huggingface dataset:
Institut supérieur de l'aéronautique et de l'espace 
 Thus undergraduate studies + the Supaero Programme account for more than a cumulated 300 ECTS credits as applicable in the European education system.
Institut supérieur de l'aéronautique et de l'espace 
 However, graduate students enrolled in the TIME double degree procedure are required to spend two-years at ISAE and spend two years in the TIME-partner institute for a total of four years resulting in a double master's degree.
Libertarian Party (Spain) 
 They believethat governments should only be able to protect people from violence, theft, fraud, and other actions that go against people's rights.
European Canadians 
 Other common ancestries were French (15.82%), Scottish (15.11%), Irish (13.94%), German (10.18%) then Italian (4.63%).
European Canadians 
 A small number of them are Jews, Deists, Agnostics, Atheists, Muslims, Bahá'ís, Paganists/Wiccas and Unitarian Universalists.
Latin American Canadians 
 Other common ancestries were Colombian (16.2%), Salvadoran (11.7%), Peruvian (7.1%), Chilean (6.7%) and Brazilian (6.1%).
Roper v. Simmons 
 The Court ruled that it is unconstitutional to execute a person for crimes they committed before they were 18 years old.
Roper v. Simmons 
 This decision affected 25 states in the country, which still allowed executions of children under age 18.
Roper v. Simmons 
 Also, the decision reversed the Court's past ruling in Stanford v. Kentucky, , which had said that executions of children ages 1618 were sometimes legal.
Roper v. Simmons 
 Until 1988, the Supreme Court had put no limits on how old a person had to be in order to be executed.
Roper v. Simmons 
 For example, in 1944, South Carolina executed a 14-year-old boy named George Stinney in the electric chair.
Roper v. Simmons 
 Stinney was the youngest person in the United States to be convicted and executed during the 20th century.
Roper v. Simmons 
 In 1988, the Supreme Court ruled in Thompson v. Oklahoma that children under the age of sixteen could not be executed.
Roper v. Simmons 
 However, the next year, in Stanford v. Kentucky, the Court ruled that juveniles ages 16 and 17 could be given the death penalty.
Roper v. Simmons 
 However, Simmons and Benjamin broke into Crook's home, drove her to a state park, and threw her off a bridge.
Roper v. Simmons 
 (In American law, thinking about killing someone ahead of time makes the killing first degree murder.)
Roper v. Simmons 
 Then the United States Supreme Court decided in Atkins v. Virginia 536 U.S. 304 (2002) that executing people with intellectual disabilities was unconstitutional.
Roper v. Simmons 
 That court decided that "a national consensus has developed against the execution of juvenile offenders," meaning that across the country, most Americans disagreed with executing juveniles.
Roper v. Simmons 
 The court ruled that executing juveniles is cruel and unusual punishment, which violates the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Roper v. Simmons 
 In a vote of 5-4, they ruled that it is cruel and unusual punishment to execute people who were juveniles when they committed their crimes.
Roper v. Simmons 
 This decision made it illegal for any state in the country to execute someone who was under the age of 18 when they committed their crime.
Roper v. Simmons 
 The Court pointed out that most states realized these things, which is why they kept teenagers from voting, being on juries, or getting married without their parents' approval.
Roper v. Simmons 
 The Court also agreed with the Missouri Supreme Court that there was a "national consensus" against executing people who committed their crimes as juveniles.
Roper v. Simmons 
 Only 7 countries other than the United States had ever executed juvenile offenders: Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and China
Roper v. Simmons 
 However, since 1990, each of these 7 countries had stopped using the death penalty for juvenile offenders
Roper v. Simmons 
 When the Supreme Court decided Roper, there were 72 other prisoners in the United States who were on death row because of crimes they committed as juveniles:
Roper v. Simmons 
 However, their death sentences were automatically cancelled and they were sentenced to spend the rest of their lives in prison instead.
Peremptory challenge 
 A peremptory challenge is a right during voir dire (the process of selecting a jury) to reject a certain number of potential jurors without having to give a reason.
Peremptory challenge 
 This kind of challenge has been more difficult to use because the Supreme Court of the United States has prohibited peremptory challenges (also called peremptory strikes) based on gender or race.
Peremptory challenge 
 Also, if there are more than two parties involved in the proceeding the court may allow additional challenges or restrict the number for all parties.
Peremptory challenge 
 To insure an impartial jury, during voir dire, prospective jurors are questioned by the lawyers and the court.
Peremptory challenge 
 Reasons may include the prospective juror's opinions on issues, personal knowledge of the case, their occupation or any reason to believe the juror may not be able to be fair.
Peremptory challenge 
 Unlike peremptory challenges, challenges for cause may not be limited to a certain number in most jurisdictions.
Peremptory challenge 
 The reason for either type of challenge is that each lawyer is trying to find jurors who are sympathetic to their case.
Peremptory challenge 
 In English common law, a prosecutor had an unlimited number of peremptory challenges while the defendant has 35.
Peremptory challenge 
 While the right to use peremptory challenges is not guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, The Supreme Court has held peremptory challenges are "to assure the parties that the jurors before whom they try the case will decide on the basis of the evidence placed before them, and not otherwise."
Peremptory challenge 
 In Turner v. Murray, , the Court held that in "special circumstances" judges must question potential jurors about racial prejudice to prevent a biased jury.
Peremptory challenge 
 In Batson v. Kentucky, , prosecutors may not use peremptory challenges to exclude jurors based on race as it violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Peremptory challenge 
 In Tanner v. United States, , the Court held that a jury verdict would not be overturned even when the jury had been consuming copious amounts of alcohol, marijuana and cocaine during the trial and deliberations.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 Batson v. Kentucky, , was a landmark decision in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that a prosecutor's use of peremptory challenges in a criminal case may not be used to exclude jurors based solely on their race.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 The Court ruled that this practice violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 For example, in Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Company, the Court allowed private litigants to use this challenge.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 The Supreme Court also allowed it in cases are excluded on the basis of gender as in J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 The principle had been established previously by several state courts, including the California Supreme Court in 1978, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in 1979 and the Florida Supreme Court in 1984.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 James Kirkland Batson was an African American man convicted of burglary and receipt of stolen goods in a Louisville, Kentucky circuit court by a jury composed entirely of white jurors.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 During this phase potential jurors are examined by the Court, the prosecution, and the defense, to determine their competence, willingness, and suitability to hear, deliberate and decide a case put to them in order to render a verdict.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 During voir dire the judge can dismiss jurors and both the prosecution and the defense have a limited number of peremptory challenges which they use to excuse any juror for any reason.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 The defense peremptorily challenged nine potential jurors and the prosecution peremptorily challenged six, including all four black persons.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 The defense counsel moved to discharge the whole jury on the ground that the prosecutor's removal of the black jurors violated petitioner's rights under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to a jury drawn from a cross section of the community, and under the Fourteenth Amendment to equal protection of the laws.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 Without expressly ruling on petitioner's request for a Hearing, the trial judge denied the motion, and the jury ultimately convicted the defendant.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 That court cited Swain v. Alabama, and held that a defendant claiming lack of a fair cross section must demonstrate systematic exclusion of a group of jurors from the panel of prospective jurors.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 That is, the defendant had to show that not just in his case, but as a process, juries in his community did not represent a cross section of that community.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 Batson continued his appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, which granted certiorari to decide whether petitioner was tried "in violation of constitutional provisions guaranteeing the defendant an impartial jury and a jury composed of persons representing a fair cross section of the community."
Batson v. Kentucky 
 The court overruled Swain v. Alabama by lowering the burden of proof that a defendant must meet to make a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 In Swain, the Court had recognized that a "State's purposeful or deliberate denial to Negroes on account of race of participation as jurors in the administration of justice violates the Equal Protection Clause", but that the defendant had the burden of proving a systematic striking of black jurors throughout the county, that is, that the peremptory challenge system as a whole was being perverted.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 In Batson the court ruled that the defendant could make a prima facie case for purposeful racial discrimination in jury selection by relying on the record only in his own case.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 A State denies a black defendant equal protection when it puts him on trial before a jury from which members of his race have been purposely excluded;
Batson v. Kentucky 
 However, the Equal Protection Clause guarantees the defendant that the State will not exclude members of his race from the jury venire on account of race, or on the false assumption that members of his race as a group are not qualified to serve as jurors
Batson v. Kentucky 
 Justice Marshall, concurring with the majority, called the decision "historic" but added: "The decision today will not end the racial discrimination that peremptories inject into the jury-selection process.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 In his dissenting opinion, Chief Justice Warren Burger argued that the court's decision in Batson "sets aside the peremptory challenge, a procedure which has been part of the common law for many centuries and part of our jury system for nearly 200 years".
Batson v. Kentucky 
 He believed the majority was replacing peremptory challenges with something very similar to challenge for cause, but was unclear in explaining the standard to be applied. "
Batson v. Kentucky 
 I join my colleagues in wishing the nation's judges well as they struggle to grasp how to implement today's holding."
Batson v. Kentucky 
 Justice Rehnquist wrote that the majority misapplied equal protection doctrine: "In my view, there is simply nothing 'unequal' about the state using its peremptory challenges to strike blacks from the jury in cases involving black defendants, so long as such challenges are also used to exclude whites in cases involving white defendants, Hispanics in cases involving Hispanic defendants, Asians in cases involving Asian defendants, and so on."
Batson v. Kentucky 
 Whether the principles of Batson applied retroactively to anyone convicted previously by juries whose racial composition was influenced by peremptory challenges not consistent with this opinion was for a time uncertain.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 In Allen v. Hardy (1986), the Court held that it did not apply retroactively to collateral review of final convictions.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 The term Batson challenge describes an objection to opposing counsel's use of a peremptory challenge to exclude a juror from the jury pool based on criteria the courts have found disqualifying, as race was the sole rationale for exclusion in Batson.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 In some cases, parties have appealed a verdict or judgment and asked it be made invalid because one or more peremptory challenges excluded a recognizable group from the jury.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 Though the Batson decision addressed jury selection in criminal trials, in 1991 the Supreme Court later extended the same rule to civil trials in Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Company.
Batson v. Kentucky 
 T.B.., the Court held that peremptory challenges based on sex alone violated the standard established in Batson as well.
Citizenship in the United States 
 Once a person is a naturalized citizen, they have all of the same rights, protections, and duties as a person who was born in the United States.
Citizenship in the United States 
 Nobody can be told they cannot vote because of their race, ethnicity, skin color, home country, disability, age, gender, or the language they speak.
Citizenship in the United States 
 Still, male United States citizens have to sign up with the Selective Service System so they could be called up if there were a draft in the future.
Citizenship in the United States 
 All American citizens, including those who live in other countries permanently, must file a federal income tax report (called a "return"), even if they do not live in the United States.
Citizenship in the United States 
 United States citizens are taxed on their income no matter where in the world they live or earn that money.
Citizenship in the United States 
 When a person becomes a United States citizen, they take an oath that says they promise they will be loyal to the United States; follow the laws of the United States; and obey the Constitution.
Citizenship in the United States 
 If a citizen is traveling in another country and gets arrested, they can ask to speak to someone from the U.S. Embassy.
Citizenship in the United States 
 It is easier to sponsor relatives who want to come to the United States: To get some types of immigrant visas (called IR and F visas), a person must be related to a U.S. citizen.
Citizenship in the United States 
 Usually, if both parents are United States citizens, and their child is born in another country, the child automatically becomes a United States citizen.
Citizenship in the United States 
 If only one parent is a U.S. citizen, it depends on how long that parent has been in the United States.
Citizenship in the United States 
 Once a person has United States citizenship, no one (including the United States government) can take it away from them, unless the person asks to give up their citizenship or gained naturalization illegally.
Citizenship in the United States 
 Americans are permitted to formally abandon their citizenship, even if they do not possess another citizenship and become stateless as a result.
Citizenship in the United States 
 Boris Johnson, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, was an American citizen because he was born there.
Citizenship in the United States 
 10 Steps to Naturalization: Understanding the Process of Becoming a U.S. Citizen (in Simple English)
Citizenship in the United States 
 United States Immigration and Naturalization Service (official website about citizenship and naturalization issues)
Gates v. Collier 
 1974), was a landmark case decided by a United States federal court called the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Gates v. Collier 
 The case had to do with the rights of prisoners at Mississippi State Penitentiary (usually called "Parchman").
Gates v. Collier 
 It was the first case to rule that many types of physical punishment against prisoners are cruel and unusual punishment, and are against the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Gates v. Collier 
 It was also the first time that the Supreme Court started supervising how the country's prisons were being run.
Gates v. Collier 
 The Eighth Amendment to the Constitution says that the state cannot give cruel and unusual punishments to anyone.
Gates v. Collier 
 The Governor of Mississippi, James K. Vardaman, said the prison was run “like an efficient slave plantation.”
Gates v. Collier 
 With Haber as their lawyer, four prisoners filed a lawsuit in federal court, saying that conditions at the prison were cruel and unusual.
Gates v. Collier 
 They said that prison trusties and guards punished and tortured prisoners in ways that were painful and humiliating on purpose.
Gates v. Collier 
 881 (1972), went first to a federal court called the United States District Court N.D. Mississippi, Greenville Division.
Gates v. Collier 
 The court found that Parchman's trusties and guards gave many cruel and unusual punishments, including:
Gates v. Collier 
 The court ruled that the prison had violated the prisoner's rights under the First, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.
Gates v. Collier 
 The Fifth Circuit Court ruled that Parchman was using cruel and unusual punishments on its prisoners.
Sher-e-Bangla Medical College 
 Sher-e-Bangla Medical College (SBMC), is a government medical school in  Bangladesh, established in 1968.
Sher-e-Bangla Medical College 
 Construction began on the college on 6 November 1964, at that time it was known as Barisal Medical College.
Château de Saint Cloud 
 At that time it was bought by Philippe of France, Duke of Orléans, the only brother of Louis XIV of France.
Château de Saint Cloud 
 Louis Philippe, Duke of Orléans, who had not visited the château since his morganatic marriage to his mistress Madame de Montesson, sold it for 6,000,000 livres.
Château de Saint Cloud 
 During the Second Empire, Emperor Napoléon III and Empress Eugénie held their imperial court at Saint-Cloud during the spring and the autumn.
Essential oil 
 Around the world, essential oils are being studied in modern clinical trials to test ancient claims of healing.
Essential oil 
 They are being studied for their effectiveness as antibacterial agents, fungicides, insecticides, pain relief, stress reduction, and skin problems.
Essential oil 
 People than believed that there were four basic elements that everything was made of: fire, water, air and earth.
Essential oil 
 With steam distillation, it can take thousands of pounds of plant matter to create just one liter of essential oil.
Essential oil 
 This method is used for delicate plants such as rose and jasmine, which can be too fragile to go through the distillation process.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 The year before, the Supreme Court had decided Brown v. Board of Education, which made racial segregation in schools illegal.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 However, many all-white schools in the United States had not followed this ruling and still had not integrated (allowed black children into) their schools.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 Finally, it explained how the United States government would make sure the schools did de-segregate.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 After the Supreme Court decided the original Brown case, it planned to hear arguments during its next court session about just how school de-segregation was going to happen.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 The Court understood that it would not be easy to get the states to follow its ruling and de-segregate their schools.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 Also, in its ruling in Brown, the Court had not given the states any instructions for how to end school segregation.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 The Court had also not given the states a deadline for when they needed to de-segregate their schools.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 When it decided the original Brown case in 1954, the Supreme Court had combined Brown with four other cases.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 If the schools had violated black students' rights by not following the original Brown decision, what should be done?
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), whose lawyers had won Brown, argued that school de-segregation should begin right away.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 The states argued back that this would be too difficult and too expensive, and that they needed more time to de-segregate.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 In a 9-0 decision, the Supreme Court ordered the states to start trying to obey the Brown decision and de-segregate their schools.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 In the Court's majority opinion, Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote that the states should integrate "with all deliberate speed."
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 Justice Warren wrote: "[These] courts will [make sure] that the defendants make a prompt and reasonable start" toward obeying Brown.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 It also set out a process for making sure schools integrated, by giving federal district courts the power to supervise the schools, control how long they could have to de-segregate, and punish them if they refused to integrate.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 However, many states, especially in the South, were able to avoid integrating their schools for years because Brown II did not set a specific deadline for integration.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 Justice Warren's ruling that schools needed to de-segregate "with all deliberate speed" was vague and could have many different meanings.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 States and schools that did not want to integrate chose meanings that gave them excuses not to let black students into their schools.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 For example, based on the Brown II ruling, a federal district court ruled that Prince Edward County, Virginia, did not have to de-segregate its schools right away.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 Several years later, in 1959, a federal court of appeals ordered the county to start de-segregating its schools.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 Finally, in 1964, the United States Supreme Court ruled that what Prince Edward County was doing was unconstitutional, and ordered the schools to re-open  without segregation.
Brown v. Board of Education II 
 Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (makes school segregation illegal)
Joseph Weizenbaum 
 Joseph Weizenbaum (8 January 1923 - 5 March 2008) was a German-American mathematician and computer scientist.
Benjamin Franklin Tilley 
 Benjamin Franklin Tilley (March 29, 1848 in Bristol, Rhode Island – March 18, 1907 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) was an admiral in the US Navy who served in the American Civil War and the Spanish-American War.
Black Hills 
 But, when European Americans discovered gold there in 1874, miners swept into the area in a gold rush.
Black Hills 
 The US government reassigned the Lakota, against their wishes, to other reservations in western South Dakota.
Black Hills 
 Unlike most of South Dakota, the Black Hills were settled by European Americans from population centers to the west and south.
Black Hills 
 The Southern Hills is home to Mount Rushmore National Memorial, Wind Cave National Park, Jewel Cave National Monument, Harney Peak (the highest point in the United States east of the Rockies), Custer State Park (the largest state park in South Dakota, and one of the largest in the US), the Crazy Horse Memorial (the largest Mountain sculpture in the world), and the Mammoth Site in Hot Springs, the world’s largest mammoth research facility.
Corn Palace 
 Other popular annual events include the Corn Palace Stampede Rodeo in July and the Corn Palace Polka Festival in September.
Corn Palace 
 It is also where the Dakota Wesleyan University Tigers and the Mitchell High School Kernels basketball teams play their games.