Questões de Inglês

THE ATTACK ON BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP

Donald Trump isn’t a lawyer, but he has lots of ideas for new laws. He has proposed to outlaw politicians’ use of teleprompters. He has pledged that he would tell Ford that it couldn’t move a plant to Mexico. But Mr. Trump’s most notable legal proposal is the elimination of birthright citizenship, under which anyone born on American soil is automatically an American.

Several of Mr. Trump’s Republican rivals have echoed his position. And whether or not the Constitution is ever reinterpreted or amended in that direction, the debate raises fascinating questions about what America is — and what America means.

When it comes to granting unconditional birthright citizenship, the United States and Canada are alone in the industrialized world: North American exceptionalism, you can call it.

Birthright citizenship applies to a range of newborns who would not get local citizenship elsewhere — the children of legal immigrants, of undocumented immigrants, of tourists, and of parents who come to the United States with the express purpose of minting an American.

Setting aside the legal question for a moment, this blanket invitation to American citizenship has enormous cultural force. It loudly communicates a brash idea: Citizenship, here at least, does not depend on parentage, blood, history, folkways. If you’re here at the moment of your crowning, then you are an American.

Now, many Americans who are not white, including this writer, can tell you their “Where are you from?” stories. People, sometimes well meaning and sometimes not, will ask that question, treating your skin color as invitation enough. But I can report that, just as often, someone will jump in before I have a chance to answer and say, “He was born in Ohio!” Birthright citizenship gives them that retort.

In Europe, it’s different. I have always found it jarring to encounter people born and raised in, say, Switzerland, who are denied its citizenship and still considered Algerians or Turks. In Europe, more than in the United States, worldly people, faced with my Indian skin, reflexively laud my “ancient,” “beautiful” origins, which is heartier praise than Cleveland usually gets from Europeans.

Birthright citizenship in America is part of something larger: The American longing to sever from history, to be a place of new beginnings. It reflects, as Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry wrote the other day in The Week, “the Enlightenment-driven belief, over and against the feudalism that prevailed in most places in Europe, that citizenship depended on a social contract, not a bloodline.”

Yet critics argue birthright citizenship has outlived its usefulness. “Automatic citizenship, once an important mechanism for the assimilation of immigrants and the strengthening of the American nation, has become a tool for its dissolution,”Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, has written.

The conservative writer Reihan Salamhas proposed amending the Constitution to require newborns to have at least one parent who is an American citizen or a lawful permanent resident in order to gain citizenship. One fear animating the debate is that automatic citizenship is easily gamed. And there are plenty of tales of people who game it — like that of the Taiwan-born entrepreneurs who charge $14,750 to whisk Chinese women, at seven months pregnant, into “baby care centers” in California.

There is also no small amount of racism wafting through portions of the movement to eliminate birthright citizenship: The worry, as old as time, of a country passing into new, different hands. The fear is that not changing the law will change America irrevocably.

The law’s defenders say the same about eliminating it: It would make America like too many other places, where history and blood matter too much.

(GIRIDHARADAS, Anand. NYTIMES, 01 set. 2015, Disponível: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/01/us/politics/the-attack-on-birthrightcitizenship.html , Acesso em: 1 de setembro de 2015)

THE ATTACK ON BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP

Donald Trump isn’t a lawyer, but he has lots of ideas for new laws. He has proposed to outlaw politicians’ use of teleprompters. He has pledged that he would tell Ford that it couldn’t move a plant to Mexico. But Mr. Trump’s most notable legal proposal is the elimination of birthright citizenship, under which anyone born on American soil is automatically an American.

Several of Mr. Trump’s Republican rivals have echoed his position. And whether or not the Constitution is ever reinterpreted or amended in that direction, the debate raises fascinating questions about what America is — and what America means.

When it comes to granting unconditional birthright citizenship, the United States and Canada are alone in the industrialized world: North American exceptionalism, you can call it.

Birthright citizenship applies to a range of newborns who would not get local citizenship elsewhere — the children of legal immigrants, of undocumented immigrants, of tourists, and of parents who come to the United States with the express purpose of minting an American.

Setting aside the legal question for a moment, this blanket invitation to American citizenship has enormous cultural force. It loudly communicates a brash idea: Citizenship, here at least, does not depend on parentage, blood, history, folkways. If you’re here at the moment of your crowning, then you are an American.

Now, many Americans who are not white, including this writer, can tell you their “Where are you from?” stories. People, sometimes well meaning and sometimes not, will ask that question, treating your skin color as invitation enough. But I can report that, just as often, someone will jump in before I have a chance to answer and say, “He was born in Ohio!” Birthright citizenship gives them that retort.

In Europe, it’s different. I have always found it jarring to encounter people born and raised in, say, Switzerland, who are denied its citizenship and still considered Algerians or Turks. In Europe, more than in the United States, worldly people, faced with my Indian skin, reflexively laud my “ancient,” “beautiful” origins, which is heartier praise than Cleveland usually gets from Europeans.

Birthright citizenship in America is part of something larger: The American longing to sever from history, to be a place of new beginnings. It reflects, as Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry wrote the other day in The Week, “the Enlightenment-driven belief, over and against the feudalism that prevailed in most places in Europe, that citizenship depended on a social contract, not a bloodline.”

Yet critics argue birthright citizenship has outlived its usefulness. “Automatic citizenship, once an important mechanism for the assimilation of immigrants and the strengthening of the American nation, has become a tool for its dissolution,”Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, has written.

The conservative writer Reihan Salamhas proposed amending the Constitution to require newborns to have at least one parent who is an American citizen or a lawful permanent resident in order to gain citizenship. One fear animating the debate is that automatic citizenship is easily gamed. And there are plenty of tales of people who game it — like that of the Taiwan-born entrepreneurs who charge $14,750 to whisk Chinese women, at seven months pregnant, into “baby care centers” in California.

There is also no small amount of racism wafting through portions of the movement to eliminate birthright citizenship: The worry, as old as time, of a country passing into new, different hands. The fear is that not changing the law will change America irrevocably.

The law’s defenders say the same about eliminating it: It would make America like too many other places, where history and blood matter too much.

(GIRIDHARADAS, Anand. NYTIMES, 01 set. 2015, Disponível: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/01/us/politics/the-attack-on-birthrightcitizenship.html , Acesso em: 1 de setembro de 2015)

THE ATTACK ON BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP

Donald Trump isn’t a lawyer, but he has lots of ideas for new laws. He has proposed to outlaw politicians’ use of teleprompters. He has pledged that he would tell Ford that it couldn’t move a plant to Mexico. But Mr. Trump’s most notable legal proposal is the elimination of birthright citizenship, under which anyone born on American soil is automatically an American.

Several of Mr. Trump’s Republican rivals have echoed his position. And whether or not the Constitution is ever reinterpreted or amended in that direction, the debate raises fascinating questions about what America is — and what America means.

When it comes to granting unconditional birthright citizenship, the United States and Canada are alone in the industrialized world: North American exceptionalism, you can call it.

Birthright citizenship applies to a range of newborns who would not get local citizenship elsewhere — the children of legal immigrants, of undocumented immigrants, of tourists, and of parents who come to the United States with the express purpose of minting an American.

Setting aside the legal question for a moment, this blanket invitation to American citizenship has enormous cultural force. It loudly communicates a brash idea: Citizenship, here at least, does not depend on parentage, blood, history, folkways. If you’re here at the moment of your crowning, then you are an American.

Now, many Americans who are not white, including this writer, can tell you their “Where are you from?” stories. People, sometimes well meaning and sometimes not, will ask that question, treating your skin color as invitation enough. But I can report that, just as often, someone will jump in before I have a chance to answer and say, “He was born in Ohio!” Birthright citizenship gives them that retort.

In Europe, it’s different. I have always found it jarring to encounter people born and raised in, say, Switzerland, who are denied its citizenship and still considered Algerians or Turks. In Europe, more than in the United States, worldly people, faced with my Indian skin, reflexively laud my “ancient,” “beautiful” origins, which is heartier praise than Cleveland usually gets from Europeans.

Birthright citizenship in America is part of something larger: The American longing to sever from history, to be a place of new beginnings. It reflects, as Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry wrote the other day in The Week, “the Enlightenment-driven belief, over and against the feudalism that prevailed in most places in Europe, that citizenship depended on a social contract, not a bloodline.”

Yet critics argue birthright citizenship has outlived its usefulness. “Automatic citizenship, once an important mechanism for the assimilation of immigrants and the strengthening of the American nation, has become a tool for its dissolution,”Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, has written.

The conservative writer Reihan Salamhas proposed amending the Constitution to require newborns to have at least one parent who is an American citizen or a lawful permanent resident in order to gain citizenship. One fear animating the debate is that automatic citizenship is easily gamed. And there are plenty of tales of people who game it — like that of the Taiwan-born entrepreneurs who charge $14,750 to whisk Chinese women, at seven months pregnant, into “baby care centers” in California.

There is also no small amount of racism wafting through portions of the movement to eliminate birthright citizenship: The worry, as old as time, of a country passing into new, different hands. The fear is that not changing the law will change America irrevocably.

The law’s defenders say the same about eliminating it: It would make America like too many other places, where history and blood matter too much.

(GIRIDHARADAS, Anand. NYTIMES, 01 set. 2015, Disponível: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/01/us/politics/the-attack-on-birthrightcitizenship.html , Acesso em: 1 de setembro de 2015)

TEXTO

Studying Roman law: Juno it’s more useful than you’d think

It might sound like it has little relevance to law students in 21st century Britain, but Roman law is valuable to your future studies and career

Some might think – given the module is compulsory for Oxbridge students – that studying the law of ancient Rome is illustrative of the intellectual snobbery and elitism often associated with those two institutions. But various law schools across the UK also offer students the chance to study Roman law, whether it be as a stand-alone module (as at Dundee or Glasgow) or as part of a wider European legal history module (available at Kent and the London School of Economics).

The very idea of studying Roman law (sometimes referred to as civil law) can be confusing to many prospective law students: it’s hard to see why studying the legal system of an empire that ended over 1,200 years ago could be useful to a new law student. After all, as Issie Forrest, 19, a law student at the University of Nottingham, points out: “If I’d wanted to study history, I’d have applied for a history degree and enjoyed the comparably greater spare time that comes with it.” But it’s wrong to dismiss studying Roman law as elitist or a waste of time – this overlooks the advantages it can offer to law students, both during and after their degree.

Studying the Roman law of contract, delict or property can provide an invaluable grounding for studying the complex English system. Bronte Cook, 20, a law student at the University of Cambridge, says: “The piecemeal nature of English law, thanks to the often unstructured development of the common law, means that certain central ideas are lost beneath layers and layers of precedent. But in many cases, the knowledge I carried over from my Roman law module allowed me to negotiate through that labyrinth.”

The Romans had the first truly advanced legal system, and Roman law principles and doctrine are littered throughout English law. The Roman concept of usucapiois almost identical to the English land law doctrine of adverse possession, and similar to prescription in public international law, while the Roman concept of consensus ad idem reflects conceptually what The siger LJ in Household Fire and Carriage Accident Insurance Co Ltd v Grant described as “practically the foundation of English law upon the subject of the formation of contracts”.

Many Roman law doctrines and maxims continue to be used in English legal cases today, making it vital for students. For example, in the case of Star Energy Weald Basin Ltd v Bocardo SA, Lord Hope referred to, and applied, the civil law maximcuius est solum, eius est usque ad coelum et ad ifernos.

Globalisation is paving the way for the increasingly international legal transactions and disputes. As a result, solicitors are required to work across numerous jurisdictions. Knowledge not only of languages but also of some of the relevant legal concepts of these jurisdictions is beneficial. Because the French, German, Italian and a vast number of other legal systems kept alive many of the Roman legal rules and principles, studying Roman law gives students a solid grounding in the fundamental principles of these jurisdictions.

Professor Andrew Borkowski, of the University of Bristol’s Faculty of Law, says studying Roman law is “a passport to the appreciation of continental legal systems”.

John Hull, a former partner at Latham & Watkins, sums it up best: “Roman law is the historical framework to so many modern aspects of civil law procedure and jurisprudence. As a lawyer who practised in international, multi-jurisdictional litigation, I have seen first-hand how Roman law concepts are woven like a thread into fundamental aspects of cases I have been involved in, both as a matter of the private and public international law.”

The concept of lis alibi pendens, which is integral to many multi-jurisdictional disputes today to the extent that is enshrined within EU law, demonstrates this. It holds that a court cannot accept jurisdiction over a case that another court is in the process of determining.

For many law students too, some of the contents of a Roman law module – as well as being useful for future studying and work – can represent a welcome break from the complexities of English law. After struggling through a book about mortgages or a never-ending article on legal causation, reading the primary sources of Roman law – much like some English case law – often make for light-hearted relief.

So don’t dismiss Roman law as an unimportant module that’s not worth studying: the knowledge it offers can be valuable to your future studies and career. And, compared to other law modules available, it’s a lot less Gaul-ling.

At: http://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/apr/11/why-studying-romanlaw-is-useful-for-law-students-careers

TEXTO

Studying Roman law: Juno it’s more useful than you’d think

It might sound like it has little relevance to law students in 21st century Britain, but Roman law is valuable to your future studies and career

Some might think – given the module is compulsory for Oxbridge students – that studying the law of ancient Rome is illustrative of the intellectual snobbery and elitism often associated with those two institutions. But various law schools across the UK also offer students the chance to study Roman law, whether it be as a stand-alone module (as at Dundee or Glasgow) or as part of a wider European legal history module (available at Kent and the London School of Economics).

The very idea of studying Roman law (sometimes referred to as civil law) can be confusing to many prospective law students: it’s hard to see why studying the legal system of an empire that ended over 1,200 years ago could be useful to a new law student. After all, as Issie Forrest, 19, a law student at the University of Nottingham, points out: “If I’d wanted to study history, I’d have applied for a history degree and enjoyed the comparably greater spare time that comes with it.” But it’s wrong to dismiss studying Roman law as elitist or a waste of time – this overlooks the advantages it can offer to law students, both during and after their degree.

Studying the Roman law of contract, delict or property can provide an invaluable grounding for studying the complex English system. Bronte Cook, 20, a law student at the University of Cambridge, says: “The piecemeal nature of English law, thanks to the often unstructured development of the common law, means that certain central ideas are lost beneath layers and layers of precedent. But in many cases, the knowledge I carried over from my Roman law module allowed me to negotiate through that labyrinth.”

The Romans had the first truly advanced legal system, and Roman law principles and doctrine are littered throughout English law. The Roman concept of usucapiois almost identical to the English land law doctrine of adverse possession, and similar to prescription in public international law, while the Roman concept of consensus ad idem reflects conceptually what The siger LJ in Household Fire and Carriage Accident Insurance Co Ltd v Grant described as “practically the foundation of English law upon the subject of the formation of contracts”.

Many Roman law doctrines and maxims continue to be used in English legal cases today, making it vital for students. For example, in the case of Star Energy Weald Basin Ltd v Bocardo SA, Lord Hope referred to, and applied, the civil law maximcuius est solum, eius est usque ad coelum et ad ifernos.

Globalisation is paving the way for the increasingly international legal transactions and disputes. As a result, solicitors are required to work across numerous jurisdictions. Knowledge not only of languages but also of some of the relevant legal concepts of these jurisdictions is beneficial. Because the French, German, Italian and a vast number of other legal systems kept alive many of the Roman legal rules and principles, studying Roman law gives students a solid grounding in the fundamental principles of these jurisdictions.

Professor Andrew Borkowski, of the University of Bristol’s Faculty of Law, says studying Roman law is “a passport to the appreciation of continental legal systems”.

John Hull, a former partner at Latham & Watkins, sums it up best: “Roman law is the historical framework to so many modern aspects of civil law procedure and jurisprudence. As a lawyer who practised in international, multi-jurisdictional litigation, I have seen first-hand how Roman law concepts are woven like a thread into fundamental aspects of cases I have been involved in, both as a matter of the private and public international law.”

The concept of lis alibi pendens, which is integral to many multi-jurisdictional disputes today to the extent that is enshrined within EU law, demonstrates this. It holds that a court cannot accept jurisdiction over a case that another court is in the process of determining.

For many law students too, some of the contents of a Roman law module – as well as being useful for future studying and work – can represent a welcome break from the complexities of English law. After struggling through a book about mortgages or a never-ending article on legal causation, reading the primary sources of Roman law – much like some English case law – often make for light-hearted relief.

So don’t dismiss Roman law as an unimportant module that’s not worth studying: the knowledge it offers can be valuable to your future studies and career. And, compared to other law modules available, it’s a lot less Gaul-ling.

At: http://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/apr/11/why-studying-romanlaw-is-useful-for-law-students-careers

TEXTO

Studying Roman law: Juno it’s more useful than you’d think

It might sound like it has little relevance to law students in 21st century Britain, but Roman law is valuable to your future studies and career

Some might think – given the module is compulsory for Oxbridge students – that studying the law of ancient Rome is illustrative of the intellectual snobbery and elitism often associated with those two institutions. But various law schools across the UK also offer students the chance to study Roman law, whether it be as a stand-alone module (as at Dundee or Glasgow) or as part of a wider European legal history module (available at Kent and the London School of Economics).

The very idea of studying Roman law (sometimes referred to as civil law) can be confusing to many prospective law students: it’s hard to see why studying the legal system of an empire that ended over 1,200 years ago could be useful to a new law student. After all, as Issie Forrest, 19, a law student at the University of Nottingham, points out: “If I’d wanted to study history, I’d have applied for a history degree and enjoyed the comparably greater spare time that comes with it.” But it’s wrong to dismiss studying Roman law as elitist or a waste of time – this overlooks the advantages it can offer to law students, both during and after their degree.

Studying the Roman law of contract, delict or property can provide an invaluable grounding for studying the complex English system. Bronte Cook, 20, a law student at the University of Cambridge, says: “The piecemeal nature of English law, thanks to the often unstructured development of the common law, means that certain central ideas are lost beneath layers and layers of precedent. But in many cases, the knowledge I carried over from my Roman law module allowed me to negotiate through that labyrinth.”

The Romans had the first truly advanced legal system, and Roman law principles and doctrine are littered throughout English law. The Roman concept of usucapiois almost identical to the English land law doctrine of adverse possession, and similar to prescription in public international law, while the Roman concept of consensus ad idem reflects conceptually what The siger LJ in Household Fire and Carriage Accident Insurance Co Ltd v Grant described as “practically the foundation of English law upon the subject of the formation of contracts”.

Many Roman law doctrines and maxims continue to be used in English legal cases today, making it vital for students. For example, in the case of Star Energy Weald Basin Ltd v Bocardo SA, Lord Hope referred to, and applied, the civil law maximcuius est solum, eius est usque ad coelum et ad ifernos.

Globalisation is paving the way for the increasingly international legal transactions and disputes. As a result, solicitors are required to work across numerous jurisdictions. Knowledge not only of languages but also of some of the relevant legal concepts of these jurisdictions is beneficial. Because the French, German, Italian and a vast number of other legal systems kept alive many of the Roman legal rules and principles, studying Roman law gives students a solid grounding in the fundamental principles of these jurisdictions.

Professor Andrew Borkowski, of the University of Bristol’s Faculty of Law, says studying Roman law is “a passport to the appreciation of continental legal systems”.

John Hull, a former partner at Latham & Watkins, sums it up best: “Roman law is the historical framework to so many modern aspects of civil law procedure and jurisprudence. As a lawyer who practised in international, multi-jurisdictional litigation, I have seen first-hand how Roman law concepts are woven like a thread into fundamental aspects of cases I have been involved in, both as a matter of the private and public international law.”

The concept of lis alibi pendens, which is integral to many multi-jurisdictional disputes today to the extent that is enshrined within EU law, demonstrates this. It holds that a court cannot accept jurisdiction over a case that another court is in the process of determining.

For many law students too, some of the contents of a Roman law module – as well as being useful for future studying and work – can represent a welcome break from the complexities of English law. After struggling through a book about mortgages or a never-ending article on legal causation, reading the primary sources of Roman law – much like some English case law – often make for light-hearted relief.

So don’t dismiss Roman law as an unimportant module that’s not worth studying: the knowledge it offers can be valuable to your future studies and career. And, compared to other law modules available, it’s a lot less Gaul-ling.

At: http://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/apr/11/why-studying-romanlaw-is-useful-for-law-students-careers