the-french-artist/wikipedia_20220301.simple_sentence_split huggingface dataset:
It was the first body of law developed in the Fifth Circuit that abolished racial segregation in prisons and held that a variety of forms of corporal punishment against prisoners is considered cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
Batson v. Kentucky,  Prosecutors may not use peremptory challenges to dismiss jurors based on their race.
Discrimination based on sexual orientation
Bowers v. Hardwick,  A Georgia law that criminalizes certain acts of private sexual conduct between homosexual persons does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment. (
Overruled by Lawrence v. Texas (2003))
Romer v. Evans,  A Colorado state constitutional amendment that prevents homosexuals and bisexuals from being able to obtain protections under the law is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Lawrence v. Texas,  A Texas law that criminalizes consensual same-sex sexual conduct furthers no legitimate state interest and violates homosexuals' right to privacy under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
This decision invalidates all of the remaining sodomy laws in the United States.
Goodridge v. Department of Public Health, 440 Mass. 309 (2003) The denial of marriage licenses to same-sex couples violates provisions of the state constitution guaranteeing individual liberty and equality.
It is not rationally related to a legitimate state interest.
This was the first state court decision in which same-sex couples won the right to marry.
United States v. Windsor,  Ruled on Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines—for federal law purposes—the terms "marriage" and "spouse" to apply only to marriages between one man and one woman.
The court ruled the law deprives same-sex couples, who are legally married under state law, of their Fifth Amendment guarantee of equal protection.
The federal government must recognize same-sex marriages that have been approved by the states.
Obergefell v. Hodges,  In Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, and Tennessee, groups of same-sex couples sued over their right to marry.
They said the states violated the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The court agreed and held the right to marry is a fundamental right protected by the Constitution.
Birth control and abortion
Griswold v. Connecticut,  A Connecticut law that criminalizes the use of contraception by married couples is unconstitutional because all Americans have a constitutionally protected right to privacy.
This interpretation of a constitutional right to privacy led to the more famous case brought by Jane Roe against prosecutor Henry Wade.
Eisenstadt v. Baird,  A Massachusetts law that criminalizes the use of contraception by unmarried couples violates the right to privacy established in Griswold as well as the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Roe v. Wade,  The court ruled that a state law that banned abortions (except to save the life of the mother) was unconstitutional.
Carey v. Population Services International,  Laws that restrict the sale, distribution, and advertisement of contraceptives to both adults and minors are unconstitutional.
Planned Parenthood v. Casey,  A woman is still able to have an abortion before viability, but several restrictions are now permitted during the first trimester.
The strict trimester framework of Roe is discarded and replaced with the more vague "undue burden" test.
Stenberg v. Carhart,  Laws that ban partial-birth abortion are unconstitutional if they do not make an exception for the woman's health or if they cannot be reasonably construed to apply only to the partial-birth abortion procedure and not to other abortion methods.
Gonzales v. Carhart,  The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 is constitutional because it is less ambiguous than the law that was struck down in Stenberg.
It is not vague or too broad.
It does not impose an undue burden on a woman's right to choose to have an abortion.
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.,  Closely held corporations have free exercise rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993.
As applied to such corporations, the requirement of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act that employers provide their female employees with no-cost access to contraception violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health,  When a family has requested the termination of life-sustaining treatments for their vegetative relative, the state may constitutionally oppose this request if there is not evidence that the relative would have wanted that.
Washington v. Glucksberg,  Washington's prohibition on assisted suicide is constitutional.
Vacco v. Quill,  New York's prohibition on assisted suicide does not violate the Equal Protection Clause.
Gonzales v. Oregon,  The Controlled Substances Act does not prevent physicians from being able to prescribe the drugs needed to perform assisted suicides under state law.
Power of Congress to enforce civil rights
Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States,  The Civil Rights Act of 1964 applies to places of public accommodation patronized by interstate travelers by reason of the Commerce Clause in Article One of the Constitution (Section 8, Clause 3).
Katzenbach v. McClung,  The power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce extends to a restaurant that is not patronized by interstate travelers but which serves food that has moved in interstate commerce.
This ruling makes the Civil Rights Act of 1964 apply to virtually all businesses.
South Carolina v. Katzenbach,  The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is a valid use of Congress's power under Section 2 of the Fifteenth Amendment.
Katzenbach v. Morgan,  Congress may enact laws stemming from Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment that increase the rights of citizens beyond what the judiciary has recognized.
City of Boerne v. Flores,  Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment does not permit Congress to substantially increase the scope of the rights determined by the judiciary.
Congress may only enact remedial or preventative measures that are consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment interpretations of the Supreme Court.
Shelby County v. Holder,  Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which contains the coverage formula that determines which state and local jurisdictions are subjected to federal preclearance from the Department of Justice before implementing any changes to their voting laws or practices based on their histories of racial discrimination in voting, is unconstitutional because it no longer reflects current societal conditions.
General rights and freedoms
Corfield v. Coryell, 6 Fed.
546 (C.C.E.D. Pa. 1823) Some of the rights protected by the Privileges and Immunities Clause in Article Four of the Constitution (Section 2, Clause 1) include the freedom of movement through the states, the right of access to the courts, the right to purchase and hold property, an exemption from higher taxes than those paid by state residents, and the right to vote.
Schenck v. United States,  Speech is not protected under the First Amendment if it causes a danger to other people.
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. famously used the comparison that free speech would not protect a person from shouting "fire" in a crowded theater and starting a panic.
Citizenship rights
United States v. Wong Kim Ark,  With only a few narrow exceptions, every person born in the United States becomes a United States citizen at birth because of the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Afroyim v. Rusk,  The right of citizenship is protected by the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Congress has no power under the Constitution to take away a person's United States citizenship unless he or she voluntarily relinquishes (gives it up) it.
Freedom to travel
Crandall v. Nevada,  The freedom of movement is a fundamental right; a state cannot inhibit people from leaving the state by taxing them.
United States v. Wheeler,  The Constitution grants to the states the power to prosecute individuals for wrongful interference with the right to travel.
Edwards v. California,  A state cannot prohibit indigent people from moving into it.
Kent v. Dulles,  The right to travel is a part of the "liberty" of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment.
Aptheker v. Secretary of State,  First case in which the U.S. Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of personal restrictions on the right to travel abroad and passport restrictions as they relate to Fifth Amendment due process rights and First Amendment free speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of association rights.
United States v. Guest,  There is a constitutional right to travel from state to state, and the protections of the Fourteenth Amendment extend to citizens who suffer rights deprivations at the hands of private conspiracies where there is minimal state participation in the conspiracy.
Military-related
Ex parte Milligan,  Trying citizens in military courts is unconstitutional when civilian courts are still operating.
Trial by military tribunal is constitutional only when there is no power left but the military, and the military may validly try criminals only as long as is absolutely necessary.
Reid v. Covert,  United States citizens abroad, even when associated with the military, cannot be deprived of the protections of the Constitution and cannot be made subject to military jurisdiction.
Gates v. Collier, 501 F.2d 1291 (5th Circuit 1974) A variety of forms of corporal punishment against prisoners constituted cruel and unusual punishment and a violation of Eighth Amendment rights.
This ruling ended the Trusty system and the flagrant inmate abuse that accompanied it at in states using the trusty system as a replacement for the convict lease system.
O'Connor v. Donaldson,  The states cannot involuntarily commit individuals if they are not a danger to themselves or others and are capable of living by themselves or with the aid of responsible family members or friends.
Olmstead v. L.C.,  Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, people with intellectual disabilities must be allowed to live in the community if they can.
If they can live in the community, keeping them in institutions is segregation and is discrimination.
Freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures
Mapp v. Ohio,  Evidence that is obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment is inadmissible in state court.
Schmerber v. California,  The application of the Fourth Amendment's protection against warrantless searches and the Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination to searches that intrude into the human body means that police may not conduct warrantless blood testing on suspects absent an emergency that justifies acting without a warrant.
Katz v. United States,  The Fourth Amendment's ban on unreasonable searches and seizures applies to all places where an individual has a "reasonable expectation of privacy."
Terry v. Ohio,  Police may stop a person if they have a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed or is about to commit a crime and frisk the suspect for weapons if they have a reasonable suspicion that the suspect is armed and dangerous without violating the Fourth Amendment.
Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents,  Individuals may sue federal government officials who have violated their Fourth Amendment rights even though such a suit is not authorized by law.
The existence of a remedy for the violation is implied from the importance of the right that is violated.
United States v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan,  Government officials must obtain a warrant before beginning electronic surveillance even if domestic security issues are involved.
The "inherent vagueness of the domestic security concept" and the potential for abusing it to quell political dissent make the Fourth Amendment's protections especially important when the government engages in spying on its own citizens.
Illinois v. Gates,  The totality of the circumstances, rather than a rigid test, must be used in finding probable cause under the Fourth Amendment.
New Jersey v. T. L. O.,  The Fourth Amendment's ban on unreasonable searches applies to those conducted by public school officials as well as those conducted by law enforcement personnel, but public school officials can use the less strict standard of reasonable suspicion instead of probable cause.
Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton,  Schools may implement random drug testing upon students participating in school-sponsored athletics.
Board of Education v. Earls,  Coercive drug testing imposed by school districts upon students who participate in extracurricular activities does not violate the Fourth Amendment.
Georgia v. Randolph,  Police cannot conduct a warrantless search in a home where one occupant consents and the other objects.
In re Directives, (2008) According to the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, an exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement exists when surveillance is conducted to obtain foreign intelligence for national security purposes and is directed against foreign powers or agents of foreign powers reasonably believed to be located outside the United States.
United States v. Jones,  Attaching a GPS device to a vehicle and then using the device to monitor the vehicle’s movements constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment.
Riley v. California,  Police must obtain a warrant in order to search digital information on a cell phone seized from an individual who has been arrested.
Right to an attorney
Glasser v. United States,  A defense lawyer's conflict of interest arising from a simultaneous representation of codefendants violates the Assistance of Counsel Clause of the Sixth Amendment.
Betts v. Brady,  Indigent defendants may be denied counsel when prosecuted by a state. (
Overruled by Gideon v. Wainwright (1963))
Gideon v. Wainwright,  All defendants have the right to an attorney and must be provided one by the state if they are unable to afford legal counsel.
Escobedo v. Illinois,  A person in police custody has the right to speak to an attorney.
Miranda v. Arizona,  Police must advise criminal suspects of their rights under the Constitution to remain silent, to consult with a lawyer, and to have one appointed to them if they are indigent.
A police interrogation must stop if the suspect states that he or she wishes to remain silent.
In re Gault,  Juvenile defendants are protected under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Michigan v. Jackson,  If a police interrogation begins after a defendant asserts his or her right to counsel at an arraignment or similar proceeding, then any waiver of that right for that police-initiated interrogation is invalid. (
Overruled by Montejo v. Louisiana (2009))
Montejo v. Louisiana,  A defendant may waive his or her right to counsel during a police interrogation even if the interrogation begins after the defendant's assertion of his or her right to counsel at an arraignment or similar proceeding.
Other rights regarding counsel
Strickland v. Washington,  To obtain relief due to ineffective assistance of counsel, a criminal defendant must show that counsel's performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and that counsel's deficient performance gives rise to a reasonable probability that, if counsel had performed adequately, the result of the proceeding would have been different.
Padilla v. Kentucky,  Criminal defense attorneys are duty-bound to inform clients of the risk of deportation under three circumstances.
First, where the law is unambiguous, attorneys must advise their criminal clients that deportation "will" result from a conviction.
Second, where the immigration consequences of a conviction are unclear or uncertain, attorneys must advise that deportation "may" result.
Finally, attorneys must give their clients some advice about deportation—counsel cannot remain silent about immigration consequences.
Right to remain silent
Berghuis v. Thompkins,  The right to remain silent does not exist unless a suspect invokes it unambiguously.
Salinas v. Texas,  The Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination does not protect an individual's refusal to answer questions asked by law enforcement before he or she has been arrested or given the Miranda warning.
A witness cannot invoke the privilege by simply standing mute; he or she must expressly invoke it.
Dusky v. United States,  A defendant has the right to a competency evaluation before proceeding to trial.
Rogers v. Okin, 478 F. Supp.
1342 (D. Mass. 1979) The competence of a committed patient is presumed until he or she is adjudicated incompetent.
Ford v. Wainwright,  A defendant has the right to a competency evaluation before being executed.
Godinez v. Moran,  A defendant who is competent to stand trial is automatically competent to plead guilty or waive the right to legal counsel.
Detainment of terrorism suspects
Rasul v. Bush,  The federal court system has the authority to decide if foreign nationals held at Guantanamo Bay were wrongfully imprisoned.
Hamdi v. Rumsfeld,  The federal government has the power to detain those it designates as enemy combatants, including United States citizens, but detainees that are United States citizens must have the rights of due process and the ability to challenge their enemy combatant status before an impartial authority.
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld,  The military commissions set up by the Bush administration to try detainees at Guantanamo Bay are illegal because they lack the protections that are required by the Geneva Conventions and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
Boumediene v. Bush,  Foreign terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay have the constitutional right to challenge their detention in United States courts.
Furman v. Georgia,  The arbitrary and inconsistent imposition of the death penalty violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments and constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.
This decision initiates a nationwide de facto moratorium on executions that lasts until the Supreme Court's decision in Gregg v. Georgia (1976).
Gregg v. Georgia,  Georgia's new death penalty statute is constitutional because it adequately narrows the class of defendants eligible for the death penalty.
This case and the next four cases were consolidated and decided simultaneously.
By evaluating the new death penalty statutes that had been passed by the states, the Supreme Court ended the moratorium on executions that began with its decision in Furman v. Georgia (1972).
Proffitt v. Florida,  Florida's new death penalty statute is constitutional because it requires the comparison of aggravating factors to mitigating factors in order to impose a death sentence.
Jurek v. Texas,  Texas's new death penalty statute is constitutional because it uses a three-part test to determine if a death sentence should be imposed.
Woodson v. North Carolina,  North Carolina's new death penalty statute is unconstitutional because it allows a mandatory death sentence to be imposed.
Roberts v. Louisiana,  Louisiana's new death penalty statute is unconstitutional because it calls for a mandatory death sentence for a large range of crimes.
Coker v. Georgia,  A death sentence may not be imposed for the crime of rape.
Enmund v. Florida,  A death sentence may not be imposed on offenders who are involved in a felony during which a murder is committed but who do not actually kill, attempt to kill, or intend that a killing take place.
Ford v. Wainwright,  A death sentence may not be imposed on the insane.
Breard v. Greene,  The International Court of Justice does not have jurisdiction in capital punishment cases that involve foreign nationals.
Atkins v. Virginia,  A death sentence may not be imposed on mentally retarded offenders, but the states can define what it means to be mentally retarded.
Roper v. Simmons,  A death sentence may not be imposed on juvenile offenders.
Baze v. Rees,  The three-drug cocktail used for performing executions by lethal injection in Kentucky (as well as virtually all of the states using lethal injection at the time) is constitutional under the Eighth Amendment.
Kennedy v. Louisiana,  The death penalty is unconstitutional in all cases that do not involve murder or crimes against the state such as treason.
Other criminal sentences
Apprendi v. New Jersey,  Other than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Graham v. Florida,  A sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole may not be imposed on juvenile non-homicide offenders.
Miller v. Alabama,  A sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole may not be a mandatory sentence for juvenile offenders.
Unconstitutional laws
Ware v. Hylton,  A section of the Treaty of Paris supersedes an otherwise valid Virginia statute under the Supremacy Clause in Article Six, Clause 2 of the Constitution.
This case featured the first example of judicial nullification of a state law.
Marbury v. Madison,  Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 is unconstitutional because it attempts to expand the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court beyond that permitted by the Constitution.
Congress cannot pass laws that contradict the Constitution.
This case featured the first example of judicial nullification of a federal law.
It is also the point at which the Supreme Court adopted a monitoring role over government actions.
Fletcher v. Peck,  A state legislature can repeal a corruptly made law, but the Contract Clause of the Constitution prohibits the voiding of valid contracts made under such a law.
This was the first case in which the Supreme Court struck down a state law as unconstitutional.
United States v. Lopez,  The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 is unconstitutional.
The Commerce Clause of the Constitution does not give Congress the power to prohibit the mere possession of a gun near a school, because gun possession by itself is not an economic activity that affects interstate commerce even indirectly.
U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton,  The states cannot create qualifications for prospective members of Congress that are stricter than those specified in the Constitution.
This decision invalidates provisions that had imposed term limits on members of Congress in 23 states.
Printz v. United States,  The interim provision of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act that requires state and local officials to conduct background checks on firearm purchasers violates the Tenth Amendment.
Clinton v. City of New York,  The Line Item Veto Act of 1996 is unconstitutional because it allows the President to amend or repeal parts of statutes without the pre-approval of Congress.
According to the Presentment Clause of the Constitution, Congress must initiate all changes to existing laws.
United States v. Morrison,  The section of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 that gives victims of gender-motivated violence the right to sue their attackers in federal court is an unconstitutional intrusion on states' rights, and it cannot be saved by the Commerce Clause or Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment.
National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius,  The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's expansion of Medicaid is unconstitutional as-written—it is unduly coercive to force the states to choose between participating in the expansion or forgoing all Medicaid funds.
In addition, the individual health insurance mandate is constitutional by virtue of the Taxing and Spending Clause in Article One, Section 8, Clause 1 (though not by the Commerce Clause or the Necessary and Proper Clause).
State powers
Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.,  Income taxes on interest, dividends, and rents are, in effect, direct taxes that must be apportioned among the states according to their populations.
This decision was voided by the Sixteenth Amendment in 1913, allowing income taxes to be implemented without apportionment.
Oregon v. Mitchell,  Congress has the power to regulate requirements for voting in federal elections, but it is prohibited from regulating requirements for voting in state and local elections.
This decision led to the ratification of the Twenty-sixth Amendment in 1971, which lowered the minimum voting age to 18 for all elections.
Heath v. Alabama,  The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment does not prohibit two different states from separately prosecuting and convicting the same individual for the same illegal act.
Limits on state powers
Chisholm v. Georgia,  The Constitution prevents the states from exercising sovereign immunity.
Therefore, the states can be sued in federal court by citizens of other states.
This decision was voided by the Eleventh Amendment in 1795, just two years after it was handed down.
McCulloch v. Maryland,  The Necessary and Proper Clause of the Constitution (Article One, Section 8, Clause 18) grants to Congress implied powers for implementing the Constitution's express powers, and state actions may not impede valid exercises of power by the federal government.
Barron v. Baltimore,  The Bill of Rights cannot be applied to the state governments.
This decision has essentially been rendered moot by the Supreme Court's adoption of the incorporation doctrine, which uses the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to apply portions of the Bill of Rights to the states.
Cooley v. Board of Wardens,  When local circumstances make it necessary, the states can regulate interstate commerce, as long as such regulations do not conflict with federal law.
State laws related to commerce powers can be valid if Congress is silent on the matter.
Ableman v. Booth,  State courts cannot issue rulings that contradict the decisions of federal courts.
Texas v. White,  The states that formed the Confederate States of America during the Civil War never actually left the Union because a state cannot unilaterally secede from the United States.
Cooper v. Aaron,  The states are bound by the decisions of the Supreme Court and cannot choose to ignore them.
Arizona v. United States,  An Arizona law that authorizes local law enforcement to enforce immigration laws is preempted by federal law.
Arizona law enforcement may inquire about a resident's legal status during lawful encounters, but the state may not implement its own immigration laws.
Federal judiciary powers
Martin v. Hunter's Lessee,  Federal courts may review state court decisions when they rest on federal law or the federal Constitution.
This decision provides for the uniform interpretation of federal law throughout the states.
Ex parte Young,  Sovereign immunity cannot be used to bar suits against state officials for injunctive relief under the Constitution when said officials were not acting on behalf of the state when they sought to enforce an unconstitutional law.
Federal Congressional powers
Hylton v. United States,  A tax on the possession of goods is not a direct tax that the federal government must split up among the states according to their populations.
This case featured the first example of judicial review by the Supreme Court.
Gibbons v. Ogden,  The power to regulate interstate navigation is granted to Congress by the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.
Swift and Company v. United States,  Congress can prohibit local business practices in order to regulate interstate commerce because those practices, when combined together, form a "stream of commerce" between the states. (
Superseded by National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation (1937))
Missouri v. Holland,  Treaties made by the federal government are supreme over any concerns brought by the states about such treaties interfering with any states' rights derived from the Tenth Amendment.
J. W. Hampton, Jr. & Co. v. United States,  The Separation of Powers can be side-stepped if Congress provides an "intelligible principle" to guide the executive branch.
National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation,  The National Labor Relations Act and, by extension, the National Labor Relations Board are constitutional because the Commerce Clause applies to labor relations.
Therefore, the NLRB has the right to sanction companies that fire or discriminate against workers for belonging to a union.
Also, a local commercial activity that is considered in isolation may still constitute interstate commerce if that activity has a "close and substantial relationship" to interstate commerce.
Steward Machine Company v. Davis,  The federal government is permitted to impose a tax even if the goal of the tax is not just the collection of revenue.
United States v. Darby Lumber Co.,  Control over interstate commerce belongs entirely to Congress.
The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 is constitutional under the Commerce Clause because it prevents the states from lowering labor standards to gain commercial advantages.
Wickard v. Filburn,  The Commerce Clause of the Constitution allows Congress to regulate anything that has a substantial economic effect on commerce, even if that effect is indirect.
South Dakota v. Dole,  Congress may attach reasonable conditions to funds disbursed to the states without violating the Tenth Amendment.
Gonzales v. Raich,  Congress may ban the use of marijuana even in states that have approved its use for medicinal purposes.
In Greek mythology, Medea (; , Mēdeia, , Medea) is a sorceress of Greek mythology.
She was the daughter of King Aeëtes of Colchis, niece of Circe, granddaughter of the sun god Helios.
She married the hero Jason, and had two children with him, Mermeros and Pheres.
In Euripides's play Medea, Jason leaves Medea when Creon, king of Corinth, offers him his daughter, Glauce.
The play tells of Medea avenging her husband's betrayal by killing their children.
The myths involving Jason have been interpreted as part of a class of myths that tell how the Hellenes of the distant heroic age, before the Trojan War, faced the challenges of the pre-Greek "Pelasgian" cultures of mainland Greece, the Aegean and Anatolia.
Jason, Perseus, Theseus, and above all Heracles, are all figures on the threshold between the old world of shamans, earth deities, and the new Bronze Age Greek ways.
Medea figures in the myth of Jason and the Argonauts, a myth known best from a late literary version worked up by Apollonius of Rhodes in the 3rd century BC and called the Argonautica.
However, for all its self-consciousness and researched archaic vocabulary, the late epic was based on very old, scattered materials.
Medea is known in most stories as an enchantress and is often depicted as a priestess of the goddess Hecate or a witch.
The myth of Jason and Medea is very old, originally written around the time Hesiod wrote the Theogony.
It was known to the composer of the  Little Iliad, part of the Epic Cycle.
A cloak is a type of loose garment.
It is worn over indoor clothing.
It protects a person, for example from cold or rain.
It may be part of an outfit or uniform.
Cloaks have been used by many historical societies.
Their designs, over time, have been changed to match fashion and available textiles.
Cloaks generally fasten at the neck or over the shoulder.
They can be different lengths, from hip all the way down the ankle.
They may have an attached hood.
They may fasten down the front.
Cloaks are almost always sleeveless.
The Equal Protection Clause is part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
The clause, which took effect in 1868, provides that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction "the equal protection of the laws".
A primary motivation for this clause was to validate the equality provisions contained in the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which guaranteed that all people would have rights equal to those of all citizens.
As a whole, the Fourteenth Amendment marked a large shift in American constitutionalism.
It applied substantially more constitutional restrictions against the states than had applied before the Civil War.
The meaning of the Equal Protection Clause has been the subject of much debate.
It has inspired the well-known phrase "Equal Justice Under Law".
These words are inscribed on the U.S. Supreme court building.
This clause was the basis for Brown v. Board of Education (1954).
This Supreme Court decision that helped to dismantle racial segregation, and also the basis for many other decisions rejecting discrimination against people belonging to various groups.
State vs federal governments
The Equal Protection Clause itself applies only to the federal government.
However, the Supreme Court held in Bolling v. Sharpe (1954) that equal protection requirements apply to state and local governments through the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
The Meaning of Equal Protection: Then, Now, and Tomorrow; American Bar Association
The 14th Amendment and Equal Protection Clause; YouTube
Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing is a truck racing video game released in 2003.
It was developed by Stellar Stone and published by GameMill Publishing.
The game was released unfinished and is missing many features, including collision detection.
It is often considered to be the worst video game ever made.
The game has five racetracks, one of which causes the game to crash when selected.
Each level starts with an opponent that either doesn't move, or in a patched version will move but will never complete the race.
When the race is finished, the grammatically incorrect message "You're Winner" is displayed, and the race ends.
There is no way for the player to lose the race or for the computer opponent to win.
It is possible to drive through buildings, up mountains, and even outside the level due to the lack of collision detection.
Generally, the state supreme court, like most appellate courts, is exclusively for hearing appeals from lower courts.
In the case where the trial court made an egregious error in its finding of facts, the state supreme court will send the case back to the trial court for a new trial.
This responsibility of correcting the errors of inferior courts is the origin of a number of the different names for supreme courts in various state court systems.
The court consists of a panel of judges selected by methods outlined in the state constitution.
Many states elect their state Supreme Court justices and/or use elections to retain judges.
Since 2000, the amount of money raised by judicial candidates has risen enormously.
Special interest groups have contributed to many of these campaigns raising questions of impartiality.
The US Supreme Court, in Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co. (2009) in a 5-4 decision, ruled that an elected state supreme court judge sitting on a case involving a campaign contributor was a violation of due process.
The phrase Investment Bank refers to a business that helps other businesses (and also governments) borrow money from other people and businesses and/or allow businesses to partially or fully sell themselves to other people and businesses.
Unlike a regular bank, they do not typically lend their own money or use their own money to purchase part or all of a business, but instead they help to match the business financing need to those other business and personal investors who are seeking to earn money by either lending to the business or owning part of the business.
In the mid twentieth century, certain investment banks started to also try and help their business clients to sell their business entirely to other businesses instead of to investors, as well as to help businesses decide what other business they should buy, in exchange for a fee based on the sale price of the business.
This activity became known as Mergers and Acquisitions and today falls into the category of investment banking.
In fact, there are many small investment banks that only offer this activity, and do not help businesses to borrow money or sell ownership in the business.
An investment bank most often helps businesses to borrow money using a form of a contract known as a bond, and to sell ownership in the company using a contract known as stock.
Most countries have developed government rules that in exchange for requirements that the business operate in a certain manner and disclose their financial results in a certain manner, they are then allowed to borrow money using bonds and sell ownership using stock to the general public, and the general public is allowed to sell bonds and stock to other members of the public without being responsible for the operations and financial disclosures of the business.
The potential for lower interest rates
The potential for an interest rate that is fixed (cannot changed) for a longer time frame than what most banks would normally allow
Investors might be more willing to lend to a company more at risk at not being able to pay than what a bank would be willing to do
To earn a profit on the amount they initially invested in the business (because there might be a larger number of buyers willing to buy businesses that are publicly traded, the price received for the business might be higher than if the owner sold the business to another individual)
To raise money that the business can use to further grow
To raise funds to pay back money that was borrowed for the business that the business owner might not be able to otherwise pay back
Wiesław Ksawery Rudkowski (17 November 1946 – 14 February 2016) was a Polish boxer.
He was born in Łódź.
He won a silver medal at the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich, losing in the final against Dieter Kottysch.
Rudkowski died from a heart attack on 14 February 2016 in Warsaw.
Wiesław Rudkowski Olympic results
Giambattista Pittoni (or Giovanni Battista Pittoni; 6 June 1687 – 6 November 1767) was an Italian painter.
His paintings are from the late Baroque or Rococo period.
He was among the people who started the Academy of Fine Arts of Venice.
Pittoni was born in Venice on 6 June 1687.
He worked there for most of his life.
He travelled to France in 1720.
It was around this time that his style of painting changed.
His style became influenced by French styles.
Pittoni joined a Venetian guild of painters in 1716.
He served as president of the Academy of Fine Arts of Venice from 1758 to 1760 and from 1763 to 1764.
He was in high demand all across Italy during his life.
Loaves and fishes
The miracle of the loaves and fishes is a 1725 painting by Pittoni.
It is in the collection of the National Gallery of Victoria, Victoria, Australia.
The story is recorded in all four gospels.
Pittoni’s depiction is of the gospel of John (6:3–13): ‘Jesus went into the mountains … a great multitude followed him, He bade them sit down, took five loaves and two fishes and, giving thanks, broke them and the disciples distributed them’.
Bacchus and Ariadne of the Senate (1730s), Senate of the Republic (Italy), Palazzo Madama, Sala Cavour, Rome
In the Louvre Museum, Paris:
Christ grants Keys of Paradise to St Peter
Continence of Scipio (1733–1735)
Susanna and the Elders (1723–1725)
Tombeau allégorique de l'archevêque John Tillotson (1630–1694) (1726–1727)
Bacchus and Ariadne (1720–1725)
Venus and Mars (1720–1725)
Sacrifice of Polyxena at the Tomb of Achilles
Dido founds Carthage
Holy family, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York
The Annunciation, Gallerie dell'Accademia, Venice; Oil on Canvas
Hagar in Desert, Church of Frari, Venice; Oil on Canvas
Justice and Peace, Palazzo Pesaro, Venice; fresco
Nativity (1740), National Gallery, London
Susanna and the Elders (1720), Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City
St Elizabeth distributing Alms (1734), Szépmûvészeti Múzeum, Budapest; Oil on canvas, 72 x 43 cm
The family (1720), Oil on canvas, 60 x 73 cm, private collection
Sacrifice of Isaac (1720), Church of San Francesco della Vigna, Venice; Oil on Canvas, 118 x 155 cm
Descent from the Cross (c. 1750), Palace of Legion of Honor, San Francisco, California
Sacrifice of Polyxena (1733–1734), Getty Museum, Los Angeles
Christ and St Peter, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford
Annunciation (1758), Accademia, Venice
Death of Joseph, Berggruen Museum in Charlottenburg Palace, National Gallery (Berlin), Berlin; Oil on canvas, 97 x 79 cm
St Jerome and St Peter of Alcantara (1725), National Gallery of Scotland, Edinburgh; Oil on canvas, 275 x 143 cm
Penitent Magdalene (1740) Accademia, Venice, Oil on canvas, 48 x 38 cm
Sacrifice of Polyxena, Hermitage Museum, St Petersburg; Oil on canvas, 129 x 94 cm
Vision of St Anthony of Padua (1730), San Diego Museum of Art, Balboa Park, California; 35 1/2 in.
x 23 1/4 in.
David and Bathsheba, 74x64 cm
Finding of Moses (c. 1730), Portland Art Museum, Oregon
Miracle of the loaves and fishes (1725), National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne; oil on canvas, 120.1x178.5 cm
Martyrdom of St Thomas, Church of San Stae, Venice
Death of Sophonisba, Pushkin Museum, Moscow; oil on canvas, 165 x 214 cm
Rest on the Flight into Egypt (1725), Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum, Madrid; oil on canvas, 108 x 135 cm
St Roch (1727), Szépmûvészeti Múzeum,  Budapest; oil on canvas, 42 x 32 cm
Allegorical monument to the glory of Isaac Newton (c. 1727–29), Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge
Nativity, Musée des Beaux-Arts, Quimper; oil on canvas, 74 × 56 cm
Stoning of St Stephen, 2nd left picture of the Church's altar of S. Maria Diessen
Death of Agripina and Death of Seneca, Dresden Gallery
Eliezer and Rebecca (c. 1725), Musée des Beaux-arts, Bordeaux
Enthroned Madonna and Child venerated by Saints Peter and Pius V (1723–1724), Church of Santa Corona, Vicenza
Madonna with Saints, Church of San Germano dei Berici
Diane and Acteon (c. 1725), Palazzo Chiericati, Vicenza;  oil on canvas, 147 x 197.5 cm
Sacrifice by Jephthah, Museo di Palazzo Reale, Genoa
Portrait of Cardinal Bartolomeo Roverella, Accademia dei Concordi, Rovigo
Jupiter protect Justice, The Peace and the Science, Plafonds decoration, Ca' Pesaro, Venice
Saints presenting a devout Woman to Virgin and Child, Cleveland Museum of Art
Allegory of Painting and Sculpture, Gallerie dell'Accademia, Venice
Annunciation,  Städelsches Kunstinstitut
Madonna of Sorrows, Museum Gemäldegalerie (Stiftung Preussischer Kulturbesitz)
Martyrdom of St Clement: Sketch for Altar at Clemenskirche, Muenster, displayed at Uppsala Universitet Konstsamling
St Peter, Kunsthalle
Pittoni died in Venice on 6 November 1767.
He is buried in the church of San Giacomo dell'Orio.
His reputation quickly faded after his death.
Interest in him was revived in the 20th century.
1687 births
The Tories were one of the two political parties which existed in Britain from the 17th to the early 19th centuries.
They were the opponents of the Whigs, which were for a long time the ruling party.
The Tories were first part of the Parliament of England, the legislature of the kingdom of England.
After the Acts of Union 1707, the Tories were part of the United Kingdom's Parliament of Great Britain, and after the Act of Union 1800 they were part of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.
The Tories were originally (1678 to about 1770) the supporters of the Catholic kings (Charles I and II, James I and II), limiting the power of UK Parliament and supporting freedoms for Catholics.
Later, (1780 to 1830) they became the New Tory Party, and were again a successful party able to hold government.
The most famous leaders of the New Tory Party were William Pitt the Younger, and Robert Peel the industrialist.
Benjamin Disraeli built the modern Conservative Party out of the remains of the New Tory Party.
James Andrew Broun-Ramsay, 1st Marquess of Dalhousie KT, PC (22 April 1812 – 19 December 1860), known as The Earl of Dalhousie between 1838 and 1849, was a Scottish statesman and a colonial administrator in British India.
He served as Governor-General of India from 1848 to 1856.
He created the doctrine of lapse; by this some Indian customs of inheritance were forbidden.
He passed The Hindu Remarriage Act in 1856.
He built the first railway line which was between Bombay and Thane.
Under his rule several independent Indian states were annexed by applying the doctrine of lapse, e.g. the state of Jhansi.
The Kingdom of Oudh was also annexed because the governor general thought its government was corrupt.
Forced migration (also called displacements) is when people are made to leave their home or homeland.
It is usually caused by violence, persecution, danger, or because an authority (such as a government) has told people to move.
People are removed either by force or because of a threat or command.
A person who has become forced to migrate is called a "forced migrant" or "displaced person".
They may be called a refugee, but that term has a specific legal definition.
Migration of people is constantly happening, but in a stable society it usually happens because a person chooses to do it.
Forced migration occurs when people's lives, well-being or freedom is endangered.
They may have little or no choice but to move.
In some cases, such as human trafficking and slavery, people are physically removed from their homes.
Occasionally a government forces people and communities out of their homes or homelands for the purposes of economic development or military.
It has been most often been associated with the building of dams and military bases.
Migration can also be forced by natural disasters, when people are forced to evacuate an area.
This is usually temporary, and people can return to their land once it is safe.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees says Afghanistan produces the most number of refugees each year.
It has held that position for 32 years.
Almost half of refugees are children under the age of 18.
Many of these are separated from their parents.
What is Forced Migration? ,
an introductory guide for those who are new to the subject.
The General Secretary of the Communist Party of China is the leader of the Communist Party of China and the highest-ranking official within China.
The General Secretary is a standing member of the Politburo and head of the Secretariat.
The officeholder is usually considered the paramount leader of the People's Republic of China.
According to the Constitution, the General Secretary serves as a member of the Politburo Standing Committee, the main governing group in China.
Since the early 1990s, the holder of the post has been, except for transitional periods, the Chairman of the Central Military Commission.
This means that the holder is also the commander-in-chief of the People's Liberation Army.
He took office on 15 November 2012.
The President of China (officially President of the People's Republic of China) is the head of state of the People's Republic of China (PRC).
On paper, the presidency is a largely ceremonial office with limited powers.
However, in recent years the General Secretary of the Communist Party has also served simultaneously as President.
His election to the office makes him paramount leader of China.
The office is classified as an institution of the state rather than an administrative post.
The current President is Xi Jinping.
He took office on 14 March 2013.
The Premier is formally approved by the National People's Congress upon the nomination of the President.
In practice, the candidate is chosen through an informal process within the Communist Party of China.
The Premier has always been a member of the powerful Politburo Standing Committee.
The Freedom Trail is a walking trail through Boston, Massachusetts.
It passes by 16 places that are important to American history.
The Trail is 2.5 miles (4.0 km) long.
It starts at the Boston Common and ends at the USS Constitution in the Charlestown Navy Yard.
William Schofield, a journalist in Boston, first thought of creating the Freedom Trail.
In 1951, he suggested building a walking trail to connect many of the important historic places in Boston.
Boston's mayor, John Hynes, agreed.
The Trail was marked with red bricks and red paint, and signs were added along the way to explain the importance of the Trail's 16 stops.
By 1953, 40,000 people were walking the Freedom Trail every year.
The City of Boston's Freedom Trail Commission is in charge of the Trail.
The costs of keeping up the Trail are supported by grants from non-profit organizations and foundations; philanthropy; donations; and Boston National Historical Park.
Stops on the Trail
The Boston Common
The Boston Common is America's oldest public park.
When the Puritans came to Boston, they bought the land from William Blackstone, who was the first European person to settle in Boston.
The Puritans turned the land into a "Common Area" where people could bring their cows to eat grass.