term.subject="separation"

Behandling af spørgsmål vedrørende værdiansættelse af pensionsordninger - herunder også skattemæssige spørgsmål - ved bodeling i anledning af separation eller skilsmisse

Summary: "Reveals how the U.S. Supreme Court's presidentialism threatens our democracy and what to do about it. Donald Trump's presidency made many Americans wonder whether our system of checks and balances would prove robust enough to withstand an onslaught from a despotic chief executive. In The Specter of Dictatorship, David Driesen analyzes the chief executive's role in the democratic decline of Hungary, Poland, and Turkey and argues that an insufficiently constrained presidency is one of the most important systemic threats to democracy. Driesen urges the U.S. to learn from the mistakes of these failing democracies. Their experiences suggest, Driesen shows, that the Court must eschew its reliance on and expansion of the "unitary executive theory" recently endorsed by the Court and apply a less deferential approach to presidential authority, invoked to protect national security and combat emergencies, than it has in recent years. Ultimately, Driesen argues that concern about loss of democracy should play a major role in the Court's jurisprudence, because loss of democracy can prove irreversible. As autocracy spreads throughout the world, maintaining our democracy has become an urgent matter"

122 forældrepar, der i andet halvår af 2019 søgte om skilsmisse, gennemførte alligevel ikke planerne efter den tre måneder lange refleksionsperiode. Det viser en ny opgørelse fra myndighederne. Snart mødes Folketingets partier for at drøfte det kriseramte skilsmissesystem

Summary: "Migration from one area to another in search of improved livelihood is a key feature of human history. The debate on international labour migration has acquired a renewed sense of urgency in recent years. Even though it improves the standard of living of the people, it has a great impact on the marriage and family. This book focuses on the direct impact of international migration on the families of migrants that are left behind in source countries. More specifically, it focuses on the impact of migration on the marital quality of the non-migrant spouses, who are left behind."

Summary: "The idea that the three branches of U.S. government are equal in power is taught in classrooms, proclaimed by politicians, and referenced in the media. But, as David Siemers shows, that idea is a myth, neither intended by the Founders nor true in practice. Siemers explains how adherence to this myth normalizes a politics of gridlock, in which the action of any branch can be checked by the reaction of any other. The Founders, however, envisioned a separation of functions rather than a separation of powers. Siemers argues that this view needs to replace our current view, so that the goals set out in the Constitution's Preamble may be better achieved"--Publisher's description

Summary: "This exhaustively researched and deftly written book offers a first-hand view of the inner workings of the Canadian federal government, with a particular focus on the interplay between the Prime Minister's Office, the Privy Council Office, the federal cabinet, and the role backbench MPs, and parliamentary committees. Brodie argues that the various workings of the PMO, PCO, the cabinet, parliamentary committees, and the role of backbench MPs puts a lie to the proposition that the prime minister has evolved into the role of a dictator of sorts with unchecked control over the levers of political power. He offers a much-needed corrective to the dominant thinking that a Canadian prime minister holds power without limits, approaching unchecked domination over party, caucus, cabinet, Parliament, the public service, and the policy agenda. In Brodie's view, the prime minister is not a tyrant. There are effective checks on executive power. The golden age of Parliament and the backbencher is probably now. The author's contribution is that of a former insider, someone who worked at the centre and witnessed the circumstances, many of them institutional in character, that constrain the prime minister. The book calls for sober second thought about many of the proposals for reform."

Summary: In this book, Peter J. Wallison argues that the administrative agencies of the executive branch have gradually taken over the legislative role of Congress, resulting in what many call the administrative state. The judiciary bears the major responsibility for this development because it has failed to carry out its primary constitutional responsibility: to enforce the constitutional separation of powers by ensuring that the elected branches of government-the legislative and the executive-remain independent and separate from one another. Since 1937, and especially with the Chevron deference adopted by the Supreme Court in 1984, the judiciary has abandoned this role. It has allowed Congress to delegate lawmaking authorities to the administrative agencies of the executive branch and given these agencies great latitude in interpreting their statutory authorities. Unelected officials of the administrative state have thus been enabled to make decisions for the American people that, in a democracy, should only be made by Congress. The consequences have been grave: unnecessary regulation has imposed major costs on the U.S. economy, the constitutional separation of powers has been compromised, and unabated agency rulemaking has created a significant threat that Americans will one day question the legitimacy of their own government. To address these concerns, Wallison argues that the courts must return to the role the Framers expected them to fulfill