| The last question was answered in just | 4 | minutes Let our thousands of members help! |
Welcome to Answerbag, a community of people sharing what they know. 
Sort answers by:
Rating |
Date
Answer 1 out of 5 by Seeya says Dont Ever Give Up on Jun 23, 2009 at 6:27 pm Permalink
Comments
(be the first to comment)
Answer 2 out of 5 by txpeaceofficer on Jun 22, 2009 at 10:35 am Permalink
Comments
(be the first to comment)
Answer 3 out of 5 by Priscilla Duck on Apr 19, 2009 at 9:15 am Permalink
Comments
(be the first to comment)
Answer 4 out of 5 by Bacchus...lives on Apr 19, 2009 at 8:27 am Permalink
Comments
Seeya says Dont Ever Give Up Apr, 19 2009 at 10:01 AM
Google driver v. travler
Answer 5 out of 5 by Seeya says Dont Ever Give Up on Apr 19, 2009 at 10:07 am Permalink
Comments
show all comments
OhLook - IamNoLongerAnonymous Jun, 25 2009 at 10:18 AM
Huh? I would suggest you re-read Thompson v. Smith. In Thompson, the court held that the license could be revoked. The court stated:
... "The power of a city to control and regulate the use of its streets is a continuing power to be exercised as often and whenever the city may think proper. The issuance and revocation of such permits by a city is merely a means of exercising the police power of the state delegated to the city to regulate the use of the public highways in the interest of the public safety and welfare. The Constitution of Virginia expressly provides that the exercise of the police power of the State shall never be abridged. Va. Const. § 159."
Seeya says Dont Ever Give Up Jun, 25 2009 at 02:51 PM
Applies to commercial use of the roads, since the public owns the roads. So long as the roads are used for private use and not for finacial gain. You as an officer of the court must protect the citzens rights, not the states or cities rights, you do not get to pick what is a right! the citzen does. you only pick out one case and do not attack all hmmm... you still have not said where you went to law school or named a proffessor. It leads me to believe that you may not be who you claim to be!
Seeya says Dont Ever Give Up Jun, 25 2009 at 02:59 PM
Mich. v Duke 266 US 576, 69, 449
State police power extends only to immediate threats to public saftey, health and welfare. do the cross on the states yourself. Mulger v.Kansas 123 US 623, 659-60 " Our system of goverment, based upon the individualty and intelligence of the Citizen, the state does not claim to control him, except as his conduct to others, leaving him the sole judge as to all that only affects himself."
Important: Answerbag cannot guarantee the accuracy of answers submitted by members, and we recommend that you use common sense when following any advice found here. Read full disclaimer.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
