10 Main Substantial Universities in California

The largest superior faculties in California are generally located in Los Angeles.

California has a complete number of 13,014 faculties and out of this there are 2079 superior faculties.
1. Belmont Senior Substantial Faculty is the largest superior faculty in California thanks to the heavy population of Westlake district. It has complete enrollees of five,336 in 2006. It is located in downtown Los Angeles and caters to college students from grades nine to twelve. It was founded in September 11, 1923 and is now led by Gary Yoshinobu as their District Principal. Group members symbolize the faculty as Sentinels. Heavy enrollment will quickly be distributed to an additional heart, the Belmont Understanding Centre now known as Vista Hermosa Understanding Centre.

2. Theodore Roosevelt Senior Substantial Faculty is the next largest faculty in California with a complete number of five,126 college students and 220 entire time lecturers. A standard faculty that belongs to the Los Angeles unified district, which caters to grades nine-twelve and a teacher scholar ratio of 1:23. Ethnicity is composed of Asians, American Indians, Non-Hispanics, Hispanics, and the Whites. As of date, the faculty is populated the most with Hispanics.

three. Long Seaside Polytechnic Substantial Faculty is the third largest faculty in California. It is located in Long Seaside. It accommodates superior faculty college students from not only Long Seaside but also Bixby Knolls, Signal Hill and Lakewood. It was founded in 1895 and was previously known as Long Seaside Substantial Faculty and now a lot more popularly known as Poly it belongs to the Long Seaside Unified District. It is populated with a lot more than 5000 college students. This faculty is not only geared toward the lecturers but also in athletics because of which Athletics Illustrated Magazine named it as “Athletics Faculty of the Century” in 2005. It has also won numerous Grammy awards for its songs plan. Well known alumni contain Snoop Dogg, Tony Gwynn, Billie Jean King, and Cameron Diaz.

4. James A. Garfield Senior Substantial Faculty is the fourth largest superior faculty in California. It caters to grades nine-twelve with a complete of 4569 college students.

five. John H. Francis Polytechnic Substantial Faculty is the fifth largest superior faculty in California. It is a thorough faculty from the Los Angeles Unified District, which is located in the Solar Valley of Los Angeles. It was founded in the 1900’s and a known rival of North Hollywood Substantial Faculty. It has a parrot mascot named Joe Poly.

six. John Marshall Senior Substantial Faculty is the sixth largest superior faculty in California. It is a general public faculty, which caters to college students in grades nine-twelve and has a complete population of 4561 college students. It was founded in 1931, named right after the Great Chief Justice John Marshall who designed the American system of constitutional law. The motto of the faculty is veritas vincit or truth conquers. College students are known as barristers considering the fact that the school’s mascot is Johnny Barrister. A short while ago, it introduced applications to assist provide faculty money a person of which is Dad or mum Involvement. This mandate indicates that moms and dads are necessary to actively take part in preparing and analysis of faculty budgets and applications.

7. Bell Substantial Faculty is the household of the mighty eagles and is the seventh largest superior faculty in California. It is an additional member of Los Angeles Unified District, which caters to college students in grades nine-twelve. It was founded in 1925 and has 4778 number of college students as of the previous study.

8. Los Angeles Senior Substantial Faculty is the eight largest superior faculties in California. It really is a general public faculty, which caters to college students in grades nine-twelve and has a population of 4405 college students.

nine. James Monroe Substantial is the ninth largest superior faculty in California. It is also less than the Los Angeles Unified District. It is preferred for its modest studying communities and magnet faculties. It was founded in 1958 and it located in North Hills California.

10. Wilson Substantial Faculty, the tenth largest superior faculty in California is an additional member of the Los Angeles Unified District, which was founded in 1937. Commonly known as Woodrow Wilson Substantial Faculty, it is a general public faculty, which incorporates college students in grades nine-twelve. It is open to college students from Hillside Village, El Sereno, and University Hills, additionally Metropolis Terrace and Ramona Gardens. It has a population of 3000 college students with a Seymour mascot identified as Mule.

Source by Christa Kowalczyk

International Law And The Right To A Healthy Environment As A Jus Cogens Human Right


To date, traditional international law does not consider human environmental rights to a clean and healthy environment to be a jus cogens human right. Jus cogens (“compelling law”) refers to preemptory legal principles and norms that are binding on all international States, regardless of their consent. They are non-derogable in the sense that States cannot make a reservation to a treaty or make domestic or international laws that are in conflict with any international agreement that they have ratified and thus to which they are a party. They “prevail over and invalidate international agreements and other rules of international law in conflict with them… [and are] subject to modification only by a subsequent norm… having the same character.” (1) Thus, they are the axiomatic and universally accepted legal norms that bind all nations under jus gentium (law of nations). For example, some U.N. Charter provisions and conventions against slavery or torture are considered jus cogens rules of international law that are nonderogable by parties to any international convention.

While the international legal system has evolved to embrace and even codify basic, non-derogable human rights (2), the evolution of environmental legal regimes have not advanced as far. While the former have found a place at the highest level of universally recognized legal rights, the latter have only recently and over much opposition, reached a modest level of recognition as a legally regulated activity within the economics and politics of sustainable development.

1. The international legal community recognizes the same sources of international law as does the United States’ legal system. The three sources of international law are stated and defined in the Restatement (Third) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States (R3dFRLUS), Section 102. The first source is Customary International Law (CIL), defined as the “general and consistent practice of states followed out of a sense of legal obligation” (3) (opinio juris sive necessitatus), rather than out of moral obligation. Furthermore, CIL is violated whenever a State, “as a matter of state policy,… practices, encourages or condones (a) genocide, (b) slavery… (c) the murder or causing the disappearance of individuals, (d) torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment… or (g) a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights.” (4) To what extent such human rights need to be “internationally recognized” is not clear, but surely a majority of the world’s nations must recognize such rights before a “consistent pattern of gross violations” results in a violation of CIL. CIL is analogous to “course of dealing” or “usage of trade” in the domestic commercial legal system.

Evidence of CIL includes “constitutional, legislative, and executive promulgations of states, proclamations, judicial decisions, arbitral awards, writings of specialists on international law, international agreements, and resolutions and recommendations of international conferences and organizations.” (5) It follows that such evidence is sufficient to make “internationally recognized human rights” protected under universally recognized international law. Thus, CIL can be created by the general proliferation of the legal acknowledgment (opinio juris) and actions of States of what exactly constitutes “internationally recognized human rights.”

2. The next level of binding international law is that of international agreements (treaties), or Conventional International Law. Just as jus cogens rights and rules of law, as well as CIL, are primary and universally binding legal precepts, so do international treaties form binding international law for the Party Members that have ratified that treaty. The same way that some States’ domestic constitutional law declares the basic human rights of each State’s citizens, so do international treaties create binding law regarding the rights delineated therein, according to the customary international jus gentium principle of pacta sunt servanda (agreements are to be respected). Treaties are in turn internalized by the domestic legal system as a matter of law. Thus, for example, the U.N Charter’s provision against the use of force is binding international law on all States and it, in turn, is binding law in the United States, for example, and on its citizens. (6) Treaties are analogous to “contracts” in the domestic legal system.

Evidence of Conventional International Law includes treaties, of course, as well as related material, interpreted under the usual canons of construction of relying on the text itself and the words’ ordinary meanings. (7) Often, conventional law has to be interpreted within the context of CIL. (8) As a practical matter, treaties are often modified by amendments, protocols and (usually technical) annexes. Mechanisms exist for “circumventing strict application of consent” by the party states. Generally, these mechanisms include “framework or umbrella conventions that merely state general obligations and establish the machinery for further norm-formulating devices… individual protocols establishing particular substantive obligations… [and] technical annexes.” (9) Most of these new instruments “do no require ratification but enter into force in some simplified way.” (10) For example, they may require only signatures, or they enter into force for all original parties when a minimum number of States ratify the modification or unless a minimum number of States object within a certain time frame, or goes into force for all except those that object. (11) Depending on the treaty itself, once basic consensus is reached, it is not necessary for all to consent to certain modifications for them to go into effect. “[I]n a sense these are instances of an IGO [(international governmental organization)] organ ‘legislating’ directly for [S]tates.” (12)

3. Finally, rules of international law are also derived from universal General Principles of Law “common to the major legal systems of the world.” (13) These “general principles of law” are principles of law as such, not of international law per se. While many consider these general principles to be a secondary source of international law that “may be invoked as supplementary rules… where appropriate” (14), some consider them on an “footing of formal equality with the two positivist elements of custom and treaty”. (15) Examples are the principles of res judicata, equity, justice, and estoppel. Frequently, these rules are inferred by “analogy to domestic law concerning rules of procedure, evidence and jurisdiction.” (16) However, “while shared concepts of of internal law can be used as a fall-back, there are sever limits because of the characteristic differences between international law and internal law.” (17) Evidence of General Principles of Law includes “municipal laws, doctrine and judicial decisions.” (18)

Treaty provisions and their inherent obligations can create binding CIL if they are “of a fundamentally norm-creating character such as could be regarded as forming the basis of a general rule of law.” (19) A basic premise of this article is that the “relatively exclusive ways (of lawmaking) of the past are not suitable for contemporary circumstances.” (20) Jonathan Charney maintains that today’s CIL is more and more being created by consensual multilateral forums, as opposed to State practice and opinio juris, and that “[consensus, defined as the lack of expressed objections to the rule by any participant, may often be sufficient… In theory, one clearly phrased and strongly endorsed declaration at a near-universal diplomatic forum could be sufficient to establish new international law.” (21) This process should be distinguished conceptually as “general international law”, rather than CIL, as the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has often done.

In like vein, Professor Gunther Handl argues that all multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) of “global applicability” create “general international law”:

“A multilateral treaty that addresses fundamental concerns of the international community at large, and that as such is strongly supported by the vast majority of states, by international organizations and other transnational actors,– and this is, of course, precisely the case with the biodiversity, climate, and ozone regimes, among others-may indeed create expectations of general compliance, in short such a treaty may come to be seen as reflecting legal standards of general applicability… and as such must be deemed capable of creating rights and obligations both for third states and third organizations.” (22)

Notwithstanding, Daniel Bodansky argues that CIL is so rarely supported by State action, that it is not customary law at all. “International environmental norms reflect not how states regularly behave, but how states speak to each other.” (23) Calling such law “declarative law” that is part of a “myth system” representing the collective ideals and the “verbal practice” of States, he concludes that “our time and efforts would be better spent attempting to translate the general norms of international environmental relations into concrete treaties and actions.” (24)

However, a review of the current status of international human rights and environmental law may reveal the mechanisms for raising environmental rights to the level of jus cogens rights. For example, the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS), whose negotiation was initiated in 1972 and signed in 1982, was considered by most countries to be CIL by the time it came into force in 1994. (25)

II. CURRENT STATUS OF THE RIGHT TO A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT No State today will publicly state that it is within its sovereign rights to damage their domestic environment, much less that of the international community, however most States do not guarantee environmental protection as a basic human right. Currently, environmental law is composed of mostly Conventional International Law and some CIL. The former relies on express consent and the latter on implied consent, unless a State avails itself of the Persistent Objector principle, which precludes it from being bound by even most CIL. Unlike for human rights and international crimes, there is no general environmental rights court in existence today. While the Law of the Sea Tribunal and other U.N. forums (e.g., the ICJ) exist for trying cases of treaty violations, non-treaty specific violations have no international venue at present. Italian Supreme Court Justice Amedeo Postiglione states that

“[T]he human right to the environment, must have, at the international level, a specific organ of protection for a fundamental legal and political reason: the environment is not a right of States but of individuals and cannot be effectively protected by the International Court of Justice in the Hague because the predominantly economic interests of the States and existing institutions are often at loggerheads with the human right to the environment.” (26)

Domestic remedies would have to be pursued first, of course, but standing would be granted to NGOs, individuals, and States when such remedies proved futile or “the dispute raises issues of international importance.” (27) For example, although the ICJ has an “environmental chamber” and U.S. courts often appoint “special masters” to handle these types of disputes, it is clear that the recognition of the human right to the environment needs an international court of its own in order to recognize such a right and remedy international violations in an efficient and equitable manner. (28)

III. THE JUS COGENS NATURE OF ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS Irrespective of specific treaty obligations and domestic environmental legislation, do States, or the international community as a whole, have a duty to take measures to prevent and safeguard against environmental hazards?

Human rights are “claims of entitlement” that arise “as of right” (31) and are independent of external justification; they are “self evident” and fundamental to any human being living a dignified, healthy and productive and rewarding life. As Louis Henkin points out:

“Human rights are not some abstract, inchoate ‘good’; they are defined, particular claims listed in international instruments such as the [U.N.’s] Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the major covenants and conventions. They are those benefits deemed essential for individual well-being [sic], dignity, and fulfillment, and that reflect a common sense of justice, fairness, and decency. [No longer are human rights regarded as grounded in or justified by utilitarianism,] natural law,… social contract, or any other political theory…[but] are derived from accepted principles, or are required by accepted ends-societal ends such as peace and justice; individual ends such as human dignity, happiness, fulfillment. [Like the fundamental rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, these rights are] inalienable and imprescriptible; they cannot be transferred, forfeited, or waived; they cannot be lost by having been usurped, or …

Getting a Regulation University student? What to Anticipate from a Law School Training!

It appears that a lot of folks aspiration of a person working day starting to be a significant profile lawyer, environment lofty ambitions for them selves as they move ahead by faculty. Nonetheless, with no information of how to get into law school and what to hope while there, individuals dreams can hardly ever turn into a truth. Where does an aspiring regulation scholar start? To whom ought to you convert for a lot more info?

The finest put to start your route to law school is by talking with a prelaw advisor. Your advisor can be discovered at your undergraduate institution and would be content to help you ascertain no matter if or not you are a candidate, in which you ought to implement, and what system you ought to abide by to realize your objective.

Regulation faculty is not for anyone. Essential pondering and writing capabilities are demanded, as effectively as a emotion for the humanities (social sciences, natural sciences, art, and other issues impacting human working experience). An education in sensible reasoning, penned and oral expression, and essential assessment offer a fantastic foundation for acceptance to law school, regardless of your major. Great performance and arduous system schedules are extremely critical in supplying an satisfactory academic heritage to a law school.

Regulation faculty will equip you to examine legal difficulties and remain abreast of the continuously transforming guidelines and procedures. A lawyer need to be equipped to feel on his or her toes and regulate to the evolving legal atmosphere in which they need to function. Lawyers need to be equipped to offer practical and smart counsel to people regarding the regulation and its operation. Apparent talking and writing capabilities are also a need to. Law school will get ready you for all of the facets of becoming a lawyer, as effectively as instructing the arts of persuasion and negotiation, which also turn into a massive part of a regulation vocation.

There is no unique curriculum that a law school follows they do range from faculty to faculty. Nonetheless, most states require a lawyer to have graduated from an American Bar Affiliation permitted law school in buy to get paid admission into the bar. These educational institutions offer the simple info and education required to acquire and go the bar test. Commonly, states require a regulation scholar to attend the law school institution for at the very least a few many years whole time or 4 many years part time. Most regulation educational institutions, though supplying education for unique sorts of legal professions, equipment their curriculum toward education a lawyer, though some have distinctive programs that equipment the understanding working experience toward a combination of regulation and other matters, this sort of as organization, science, engineering, or community administration.

Quite a few regulation educational institutions will start out their to start with calendar year college students with subjects this sort of as civil technique, contracts, felony regulation and technique, constitutional law, residence regulation, legal writing, and tort. Sooner or later, in their objective of education a lawyer, the educational institutions will put college students in internships, which are utilised toward tutorial credits. Others emphasize employing the governmental and legal methods of the group for education needs.

There are a lot of questions concerned in getting ready for law school, and this posting only touches on some of the fundamental principles. Once more, the finest put to start you off on a successful vocation route in regulation is with a prelaw advisor, who can guide you in clearing up any issues not addressed listed here.…

The Legislation And Its Branches

Legislation is said to be the top science. Legislation retains societies functioning and in purchase. It is a person of the most primary social establishments of culture and without the need of it culture would damage by itself. Laws notify the customers and governors of culture about the method in which they must act. These rules are enforced by law enforcement forces. Laws can be changed by well known desire or by the govt. Legal professionals and judges interpret the legislation and they’re responsibility is to act as an middleman involving the persons and the legislation.

The legislation is divided into two principal branches. These are – Community Legislation and Non-public Legislation. These two branches can be divided further but the difference involving the branches of private and general public legislation is quite smaller. The branches usually overlap and it is only by conference that the branches exist.

The branches of general public legislation are as follows:

1. Prison Legislation: deals with crimes. These crimes can vary from theft to murder. The laws under this part determine the offences, states the rules of arrest, and the feasible punishments. In most nations laws are outlined by the structure and the central or federal govt. Even so in some nations like the United States, states have their have laws as effectively.

two. Constitutional Law: defines the rules and code of perform for the govt and its different departments. It also states the most primary legal rights of the persons. These legal rights such as liberty of speech and liberty of faith are certain to all citizens of that state. These legal rights are upheld by the courts through the state.

three. Administrative Legislation: governs the operations of govt businesses. These are the businesses that regulate different areas of our life like banking, communications and trade. It also includes social welfare plans, social security and coverage.

four. International Legislation: This legislation is intended to make dealings between nations easier. This legislation is much more like protocol and is quite tough to enforce.

The branches of private legislation are as follows:

1. Agreement and Professional Legislation: These laws offer solely with matters that involve contracts between persons. By definition a contract is a legal agreement between persons or persons. Contracts are essential in purchase to carry out each day company. Disputes arising from contracts are dealt with under this part of the legislation.

two. Tort Legislation: These laws offer with injuries brought about to a particular person by other people today or corporations. This includes the unlawful use of a person’s house such as his or her title.

three. Property Legislation: As the heading indicates this part deals with the ownership and use of house. This house could anything at all from a setting up to a automobile.

four. Inheritance or Succession Legislation: These offer with the legal rights of inheritance of house. These laws are different in all nations.

5. Family Law: These govern the legal facet of the family members, such as the rules of adoption, marriage, divorce and youngster guidance.

six. Company Legislation: deals with company and stockholders. This department is usually classed alongside one another with contract and professional legislation as company legislation.

Resource by Caroll Giles

Maxims of Common Law&#039 Are Overlooked In Loved ones Court docket

Courts make determinations in regulation and in equity. By ‘in law’ is intended adhering to a particular regulation – constitutional law, state regulation, and so on. By ‘in equity’ is intended identifying what is ‘fair’ to do wherever now regulation especially procedures. An example is identifying how to distribute the property in a divorce between the spouse and spouse.

Widespread regulation refers to the myriad of conclusions made by judges and appeals courts. Maxims of Common Law are ‘guiding truths’. Adhering to them will help judges make fairer conclusions. They’re dismissed in loved ones court docket determinations because fairness is a wholly secondary situation. This posting overviews what these maxims are.

Maxims are unquestionably vital to the preservation of rights and fair treatment method to all litigants. Maxims:

* stand for ‘self-evident’ truth of the matter – as outlined in our Declaration of Independence when it referred to ‘all men’ as staying established equal.

* provide to guidebook judicial determinations in the identical way that ‘axioms’ guidebook the analysis of mathematical determinations

* promotes fair dealing and unbiased justice – a clearly vital situation in the objective of courts

Courts, mainly proven to enforce the rules of common law, are sure by common law procedures of equity that ought to be grounded in the by no means-switching maxims. This grounding serves to restrain the court’s wanton discretion in equity regulation determinations.

Examples of Maxims:

Let us take a look at some examples to see the nature of maxims -as self-evidently fair. Here is an significant a person:

*The certainty of a issue arises only from making a issue certain.

This indicates that the court docket ought to find crystal clear evidence of allegations made from anyone and not rule on just the allegations or weakly supported ones. Loved ones court docket ignores these maxims all the time.

*The security of the individuals are unable to be judged but by the security of each specific.

Regulations which supposedly protect the security of some individuals at the price of other people’s rights violate this maxim. A crystal clear example of these types of a violation is existing working day domestic restraining get rules which are rampantly and unjustly imposed on so numerous fathers.

*Law is unjust wherever it is uncertain or obscure in its meaning.

Regulations ought to be crystal clear so that a person understands precisely when he is breaking these types of a regulation. Don’t forget the violation of rules brings effects on those who violate them. Imprecise rules are regarded unconstitutional. An example of obscure typical of regulation is the ‘best interest of the child’ typical – utilized to unjustly deny in shape fathers custody of their little ones.

*The Burden of Proof lies on him who asserts the actuality -not on him who denies it.

This is based on the actuality that you cannot demonstrate a unfavorable. Courts that power individuals to demonstrate a unfavorable are examples of kangaroo courts. Loved ones courts jail fathers when they cannot demonstrate that they do not have revenue to pay back!

*No a person ought to be considered other than on his oath.

This basically usually means that any person who will give testimony need to be sworn in. That way he can be charged with perjury – which is a felony (a critical criminal offense) – if he can be discovered to be intentionally lying. No ‘swearing in’ usually means no perjury and no penalty for lying.

*Perjured witnesses ought to be punished for perjury and for the crimes they falsely accuse from him.

This is the base line of enforcing honesty in court docket testimony. Regretably perjury is pretty much by no means punished -enabling the degradation of court docket integrity – so evident in loved ones court docket.

*Each individual dwelling is a castle while the winds of heaven blow through it, officers of the state are unable to enter.

This is from English common law which made a man’s dwelling sacrosanct. It ought to however be legitimate. It demands officers to have warrants to enter a dwelling. A warrant is permission from a judge based on fantastic lead to to enter a dwelling.

*No person ought to profit by his own completely wrong or, He who does not have cleanse hands, are unable to benefit from the regulation

This is self-apparent. An extraordinary situation is the child that pleads mercy simply because he is an orphan – but only simply because he murdered his mom and dad.

*He who makes use of his legal rights harms no a person.

But, fathers are routinely punished by searching for their rights in loved ones court docket.

*No a person is punished except for some completely wrong act or fault.

But compelled into the noncustodial standing for undertaking no completely wrong would be regarded punishment by any fair human being.

*It is pure that he who bears the demand of a issue, ought to receive the earnings.

If you have all the obligations for a thing but none of the gains, then you are a slave.

Fathers who go to loved ones court docket notice crystal clear violations of these maxims all the time. These types of violations necessarily mean that there is a tyranny having place.

Source by Shane Flait