document_title: United States House Committee on Appropriations

question_text: who is the ranking member of the appropriations committee

text: History[edit]

text: The constitutional basis for the Appropriations Committee comes from Article one, Section nine, Clause seven of the U.S. Constitution, which says

text: This clearly delegated the power of appropriating money to Congress, but was vague beyond that. Originally, the power of appropriating was taken by the Committee on Ways and Means, but the United States Civil War placed a large burden on the Congress, and at the end of that conflict, a reorganization occurred.

text: The Committee was created on December 11, 1865, when the House separated the tasks of the Committee on Ways and Means into three parts.[2] The passage of legislation affecting taxes remained with Ways and Means. The power to regulate banking was transferred to the Committee on Banking and Commerce. The power to appropriate money—to control the federal pursestrings—was given to the newly created Appropriations Committee.

text: At the time of creation the membership of the committee stood at nine; it currently has 53 members.[2] The power of the committee has only grown since its founding; many of its members and chairmen have gone on to even higher posts. For example, four of them--Samuel Randall (D-PA), Joseph Cannon (R-IL), Joseph Byrns (D-TN) and Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)--have gone on to become the Speaker of the House, and one, James Garfield, has gone on to become President.

text: The root of the Committee's power is its ability to disburse funds, and thus as the federal budget has risen, so has the power of the Appropriations Committee. The first budget of the U.S., in 1789, was for $639,000—a hefty sum for the time, but a much smaller amount relative to the economy than the federal budget would later become. By the time the Appropriations committee was founded, the Civil War and inflation had raised expenditures to roughly $1.3 billion, increasing the clout of Appropriations. Expenditures continued to follow this pattern—rising sharply during wars before settling down—for over 100 years.

text: Another important development for Appropriations occurred in the presidency of Warren G. Harding. Harding was the first President to deliver a budget proposal to Congress (see United States budget process).

text: In May 1945 when Congressman Albert J. Engel queried extra funds for the Manhattan Project, the administration approved a visit to CEW (and HEW if desired) by selected legislators, including Engel, Mahon, Snyder, John Taber and Clarence Cannon (the committee chairman). About a month earlier Taber and Cannon had nearly come to blows over expenditure. But after visiting the Clinton Engineer Works at Oak Ridge Taber asked General Groves and Colonel Nichols "Are you sure you’re asking for enough money? Cannon commented "Well, I never expected to hear that from you, John." [3]

text: In the early 1970s, the Appropriations committee faced a crisis. President Richard Nixon began "impounding" funds, not allowing them to be spent, even when Congress had specifically appropriated money for a cause. This was essentially a line-item veto. Numerous court cases were filed by outraged interest groups and members of Congress. Eventually, the sense that Congress needed to regain control of the budget process led to the adoption of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, which finalized the budget process in its current form.

text: Role[edit]

text: The Appropriations committee is widely recognized by political scientists as one of the "power committees,"[citation needed] since it holds the power of the purse. Openings on the Appropriations committee are often hotly demanded, and are doled out as rewards. It is one of the exclusive committees of the House, meaning its members typically sit on no other committee. Under House Rules, an exception to this is that five Members of the Appropriations Committee must serve on the House Budget Committee—three for the Majority and two for the Minority. Much of the power of the committee comes from the inherent utility of controlling spending. Its subcommittee chairmen are often called "Cardinals" because of the power they wield over the budget.

text: Since Congress is elected from single-member districts, how well the member secures rewards for his or her district is one of the best indicators as to whether or not he or she will be reelected. One way to achieve popularity in one's district is to bring it federal spending, thus creating jobs and raising economic performance. This type of spending is often derided by critics as pork barrel spending, while those who engage in it generally defend it as necessary and appropriate expenditure of government funds. The members of the Appropriations committee can do this better than most, and as such the appointment is regarded as a plus. This help can also be directed towards other members, increasing the stature of committee members in the House and helping them gain support for leadership positions or other honors.

text: The committee tends to be less partisan than other committees or the House overall. While the minority party will offer amendments during committee consideration, appropriations bills often get significant bipartisan support, both in committee and on the House floor. This atmosphere can be attributed to the fact that all committee members have a compelling interest in ensuring legislation will contain money for their own districts. Conversely, because members of this committee can easily steer money to their home districts, it is considered very difficult to unseat a member of this committee at an election—especially if he or she is a "Cardinal".

text: In addition, the ability to appropriate money is useful to lobbyists and interest groups; as such, being on Appropriations makes it easier to collect campaign contributions (see campaign finance).

text: Membership[edit]

text:
Members, 115th Congress

Majority [4]
Minority [5]

Rodney Frelinghuysen, New Jersey, Chairman
Hal Rogers, Kentucky
Robert Aderholt, Alabama
Kay Granger, Texas
Mike Simpson, Idaho
John Culberson, Texas
John Carter, Texas
Ken Calvert, California
Tom Cole, Oklahoma
Mario Diaz-Balart, Florida
Charlie Dent, Pennsylvania
Tom Graves, Georgia
Kevin Yoder, Kansas
Steve Womack, Arkansas
Jeff Fortenberry, Nebraska
Tom Rooney, Florida
Chuck Fleischmann, Tennessee
Jaime Herrera Beutler, Washington
David Joyce, Ohio
David Valadao, California
Andy Harris, Maryland
Martha Roby, Alabama
Mark Amodei, Nevada
Chris Stewart, Utah
David Young, Iowa
Evan Jenkins, West Virginia
Steven Palazzo, Mississippi
Dan Newhouse, Washington[6]
John Moolenaar, Michigan
Scott Taylor, Virginia

Nita Lowey, New York, Ranking Member
Marcy Kaptur, Ohio
Pete Visclosky, Indiana
José Serrano, New York
Rosa DeLauro, Connecticut
David Price, North Carolina
Lucille Roybal-Allard, California
Sanford Bishop, Georgia
Barbara Lee, California
Betty McCollum, Minnesota
Tim Ryan, Ohio
Dutch Ruppersberger, Maryland
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Florida
Henry Cuellar, Texas
Chellie Pingree, Maine
Mike Quigley, Illinois
Derek Kilmer, Washington, Vice Ranking Member
Matt Cartwright, Pennsylvania
Grace Meng, New York[7]
Mark Pocan, Wisconsin
Katherine Clark, Massachusetts
Pete Aguilar, California

tag: table

text: Subcommittees[edit]

text: Reorganization in 2007[edit]

text: In 2007, the number of subcommittees was increased to 12 at the start of the 110th Congress. This reorganization, developed by Chairman David Obey and his Senate counterpart, Robert Byrd, for the first time provided for common subcommittee structures between both houses, a move that both chairmen hoped will allow Congress to "complete action on each of the government funding on time for the first time since 1994".[8]

text: The new structure added the Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government, and transferred jurisdiction over Legislative Branch appropriations from the full committee to a newly reinstated Legislative Branch Subcommittee, which had not existed since the 108th Congress.

text: List of subcommittees[edit]

text:
Subcommittee
Chair
Ranking Member

Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies
Robert Aderholt (R-AL)
Sanford Bishop (D-GA)

Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies
John Culberson (R-TX)
José E. Serrano (D-NY)

Defense
Kay Granger (R-TX)
Pete Visclosky (D-IN)

Energy and Water Development
Mike Simpson (R-ID)
Marcy Kaptur (D-OH)

Financial Services and General Government
Tom Graves (R-GA)
Mike Quigley (D-IL)

Homeland Security
John Carter (R-TX)
Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA)

Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Ken Calvert (R-CA)
Betty McCollum (D-MN)

Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies
Tom Cole (R-OK)
Rosa DeLauro (D-CT)

Legislative Branch
Kevin Yoder (R-KS)
Tim Ryan (D-OH)

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies
Charlie Dent (R-PA)
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL)

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs
Hal Rogers (R-KY)
Nita Lowey (D-NY)

Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies
Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL)
David Price (D-NC)

text: Chairmen, 1865-present[edit]

text:
Chairman
Party
State
Years

Thaddeus Stevens
Republican
Pennsylvania
1865–1868

Elihu B. Washburne
Republican
Illinois
1868–1869

Henry L. Dawes
Republican
Massachusetts
1869–1871

James A. Garfield
Republican
Ohio
1871–1875

Samuel J. Randall
Democratic
Pennsylvania
1875–1876

William S. Holman
Democratic
Indiana
1876–1877

Hiester Clymer
Democratic
Pennsylvania
1877

John D. C. Atkins
Democratic
Tennessee
1877–1881

Frank Hiscock
Republican
New York
1881–1883

Samuel J. Randall
Democratic
Pennsylvania
1883–1889

Joseph G. Cannon
Republican
Illinois
1889–1891

William S. Holman
Democratic
Indiana
1891–1893

Joseph D. Sayers
Democratic
Texas
1893–1895

Joseph G. Cannon
Republican
Illinois
1895–1903

James A. Hemenway
Republican
Indiana
1903–1905

James Albertus Tawney
Republican
Minnesota
1905–1911

John J. Fitzgerald
Democratic
New York
1911–1917

J. Swagar Sherley
Democratic
Kentucky
1917–1919

James W. Good
Republican
Iowa
1919–1921

Charles Russell Davis
Republican
Minnesota
1921–1923

Martin B. Madden
Republican
Illinois
1923–1928

Daniel R. Anthony, Jr.
Republican
Kansas
1928–1929

William R. Wood
Republican
Indiana
1929–1931

Joseph W. Byrns
Democratic
Tennessee
1931–1933

James P. Buchanan
Democratic
Texas
1933–1937

Edward T. Taylor
Democratic
Colorado
1937–1941

Clarence Cannon
Democratic
Missouri
1941–1947

John Taber
Republican
New York
1947–1949

Clarence Cannon
Democratic
Missouri
1949–1953

John Taber
Republican
New York
1953–1955

Clarence Cannon
Democratic
Missouri
1955–1964

George H. Mahon
Democratic
Texas
1964–1979

Jamie L. Whitten
Democratic
Mississippi
1979–1993

William H. Natcher
Democratic
Kentucky
1993–1994

David R. Obey
Democratic
Wisconsin
1994–1995

Bob Livingston
Republican
Louisiana
1995–1999

C.W. Bill Young
Republican
Florida
1999–2005

Jerry Lewis
Republican
California
2005–2007

David R. Obey
Democratic
Wisconsin
2007–2011

Hal Rogers
Republican
Kentucky
2011–2017

Rodney Frelinghuysen
Republican
New Jersey
2017–present


document_title: List of Olympic medalists in curling

question_text: who won the women's gold medal curling

question_tokens: who won the women 's gold medal curling

root

text: List of Olympic medalists in curling

text: Medalists[edit]

text: Men[edit]

text:
Games
Gold
Silver
Bronze

1924 Chamonix
details
 Great Britain (GBR)1
William Jackson
Robin Welsh
Thomas Murray
Laurence Jackson
D. G. Astley
 Sweden (SWE)
Johan Petter Åhlén
Carl August Kronlund
Ture Ödlund
Carl Wilhelm Petersén
Carl Axel Pettersson
Erik Severin
Karl Wahlberg
Victor Wetterström
 France (FRA)
Henri Cournollet
Georges André
Armand Bénédic
Pierre Canivet
Robert Planque
Henri Aldebert

1928–1994
not included in the Olympic programme

1998 Nagano
details
 Switzerland (SUI)
Patrick Hürlimann
Patrik Lörtscher
Daniel Müller
Diego Perren
Dominic Andres
 Canada (CAN)
Mike Harris
Richard Hart
Collin Mitchell
George Karrys
Paul Savage
 Norway (NOR)
Eigil Ramsfjell
Jan Thoresen
Stig-Arne Gunnestad
Tore Torvbråten
Anthon Grimsmo

2002 Salt Lake City
details
 Norway (NOR)
Pål Trulsen
Lars Vågberg
Flemming Davanger
Bent Ånund Ramsfjell
Torger Nergård
 Canada (CAN)
Kevin Martin
Don Walchuk
Carter Rycroft
Don Bartlett
Ken Tralnberg
 Switzerland (SUI)
Andreas Schwaller
Christof Schwaller
Markus Eggler
Damian Grichting
Marco Ramstein

2006 Turin
details
 Canada (CAN)
Brad Gushue
Mark Nichols
Russ Howard
Jamie Korab
Mike Adam
 Finland (FIN)
Markku Uusipaavalniemi
Wille Mäkelä
Kalle Kiiskinen
Teemu Salo
Jani Sullanmaa
 United States (USA)
Pete Fenson
Shawn Rojeski
Joseph Polo
John Shuster
Scott Baird

2010 Vancouver
details
 Canada (CAN)
Kevin Martin
John Morris
Marc Kennedy
Ben Hebert
Adam Enright
 Norway (NOR)
Thomas Ulsrud
Torger Nergård
Christoffer Svae
Håvard Vad Petersson
Thomas Løvold
 Switzerland (SUI)
Ralph Stöckli
Jan Hauser
Markus Eggler
Simon Strübin
Toni Müller

2014 Sochi
details
 Canada (CAN)
Brad Jacobs
Ryan Fry
E. J. Harnden
Ryan Harnden
Caleb Flaxey
 Great Britain (GBR)
David Murdoch
Greg Drummond
Scott Andrews
Michael Goodfellow
Tom Brewster
 Sweden (SWE)
Niklas Edin
Sebastian Kraupp
Fredrik Lindberg
Viktor Kjäll
Oskar Eriksson

2018 Pyeongchang
details
 United States (USA)
John Shuster
Tyler George
Matt Hamilton
John Landsteiner
Joe Polo
 Sweden (SWE)
Niklas Edin
Oskar Eriksson
Rasmus Wranå
Christoffer Sundgren
Henrik Leek
 Switzerland (SUI)
Benoît Schwarz
Claudio Pätz
Peter de Cruz
Valentin Tanner
Dominik Märki

text: Medals:

tag: ul

text:
[show]Rank
Nation
Gold
Silver
Bronze
Total

1
 Canada
3
2
0
5

2
 Norway
1
1
1
3

3
 Great Britain
1
1
0
2

4
  Switzerland
1
0
3
4

5
 United States
1
0
1
2

6
 Sweden
0
2
1
3

7
 Finland
0
1
0
1

8
 France
0
0
1
1

Total
7
7
7
21

text: Women[edit]

text:
Games
Gold
Silver
Bronze

1998 Nagano
details
 Canada (CAN)
Sandra Schmirler
Jan Betker
Joan McCusker
Marcia Gudereit
Atina Ford
 Denmark (DEN)
Helena Blach Lavrsen
Margit Pörtner
Dorthe Holm
Trine Qvist
Jane Bidstrup
 Sweden (SWE)
Elisabet Gustafson
Katarina Nyberg
Louise Marmont
Elisabeth Persson
Margaretha Lindahl

2002 Salt Lake City
details
 Great Britain (GBR)
Rhona Martin
Deborah Knox
Fiona MacDonald
Janice Rankin
Margaret Morton
 Switzerland (SUI)
Luzia Ebnöther
Mirjam Ott
Tanya Frei
Laurence Bidaud
Nadia Röthlisberger
 Canada (CAN)
Kelley Law
Julie Skinner
Georgina Wheatcroft
Diane Nelson
Cheryl Noble

2006 Turin
details
 Sweden (SWE)
Anette Norberg
Eva Lund
Cathrine Lindahl
Anna Svärd
Ulrika Bergman
 Switzerland (SUI)
Mirjam Ott
Binia Beeli
Valeria Spälty
Michèle Moser
Manuela Kormann
 Canada (CAN)
Shannon Kleibrink
Amy Nixon
Glenys Bakker
Christine Keshen
Sandra Jenkins

2010 Vancouver
details
 Sweden (SWE)
Anette Norberg
Eva Lund
Cathrine Lindahl
Anna Le Moine
Kajsa Bergström
 Canada (CAN)
Cheryl Bernard
Susan O'Connor
Carolyn Darbyshire
Cori Bartel
Kristie Moore
 China (CHN)
Wang Bingyu
Liu Yin
Yue Qingshuang
Zhou Yan
Liu Jinli

2014 Sochi
details
 Canada (CAN)
Jennifer Jones
Kaitlyn Lawes
Jill Officer
Dawn McEwen
Kirsten Wall
 Sweden (SWE)
Margaretha Sigfridsson
Maria Prytz
Christina Bertrup
Maria Wennerström
Agnes Knochenhauer
 Great Britain (GBR)
Eve Muirhead
Anna Sloan
Vicki Adams
Claire Hamilton
Lauren Gray

2018 Pyeongchang
details
 Sweden (SWE)
Anna Hasselborg
Sara McManus
Agnes Knochenhauer
Sofia Mabergs
Jennie Wåhlin
 South Korea (KOR)
Kim Eun-jung
Kim Kyeong-ae
Kim Seon-yeong
Kim Yeong-mi
Kim Cho-hi
 Japan (JPN)
Satsuki Fujisawa
Chinami Yoshida
Yumi Suzuki
Yurika Yoshida
Mari Motohashi

text: Medals:

text:
[show]Rank
Nation
Gold
Silver
Bronze
Total

1
 Sweden
3
1
1
5

2
 Canada
2
1
2
5

3
 Great Britain
1
0
1
2

4
  Switzerland
0
2
0
2

5
 Denmark
0
1
0
1

 South Korea
0
1
0
1

7
 China
0
0
1
1

 Japan
0
0
1
1

Total
6
6
6
18

text: Mixed doubles[edit]

text:
Games
Gold
Silver
Bronze

2018 Pyeongchang
details
 Canada (CAN)
Kaitlyn Lawes
John Morris
 Switzerland (SUI)
Jenny Perret
Martin Rios
 Norway (NOR)
Kristin Skaslien
Magnus Nedregotten

text: Medals:

text:
[show]Rank
Nation
Gold
Silver
Bronze
Total

1
 Canada
1
0
0
1

2
  Switzerland
0
1
0
1

3
 Norway
0
0
1
1

Total
1
1
1
3

text: Notes[edit]

text: ^ The members of the 1924 British team vary depending on the source. William Jackson, Robin Welsh, Thomas Murray and Laurence Jackson are listed as the medallists by the British Olympic Association and International Society of Olympic Historians.[11][12] The Herald reports that those four are the only British curlers that played, and they received gold medals and certificates.[3] However, the IOC database omits Laurence Jackson and includes T. Aikman, D. G. Astley, W. Brown, R. Cousin and J. McLeod.[13] According to The Herald, the IOC believes that those five also received medals.[3] The World Curling Federation's list agrees with the BOA, but also lists John T. Robertson Aikman [incorrectly] as an alternate.[14]

tag: ol

text: Athlete medal leaders[edit]

text:
Athlete
Nation
Olympics
Gold
Silver
Bronze
Total

Morris, JohnJohn Morris
 Canada (CAN)
2010, 2018
2
0
0
2

Norberg, AnetteAnette Norberg
 Sweden (SWE)
2006, 2010
2
0
0
2

Lawes, KaitlynKaitlyn Lawes
 Canada (CAN)
2014, 2018
2
0
0
2

Lund, EvaEva Lund
 Sweden (SWE)
2006, 2010
2
0
0
2

Lindahl, CathrineCathrine Lindahl
 Sweden (SWE)
2006, 2010
2
0
0
2

Le Moine, AnnaAnna Le Moine
 Sweden (SWE)
2006, 2010
2
0
0
2

Knochenhauer, AgnesAgnes Knochenhauer
 Sweden (SWE)
2014, 2018
1
1
0
2

Martin, KevinKevin Martin
 Canada (CAN)
2002, 2010
1
1
0
2

Nergård, TorgerTorger Nergård
 Norway (NOR)
2002, 2010
1
1
0
2

Shuster, JohnJohn Shuster
 United States (USA)
2006, 2018
1
0
1
2

Polo, JoeJoe Polo
 United States (USA)
2006, 2018
1
0
1
2

Ott, MirjamMirjam Ott
 Switzerland (SUI)
2002, 2006
0
2
0
2

Edin, NiklasNiklas Edin
 Sweden (SWE)
2014, 2018
0
1
1
2

Eriksson, OskarOskar Eriksson
 Sweden (SWE)
2014, 2018
0
1
1
2


document_title: Illinois River

question_text: where do the illinois and mississippi rivers meet

text: Illinois River

text: Hydrography[edit]

text: The Illinois River is formed by the confluence of the Kankakee River and the Des Plaines River in eastern Grundy County, approximately 10 miles (16 km) southwest of Joliet. This river flows west across northern Illinois, passing Morris and Ottawa, where it is joined by the Mazon River and Fox River. At LaSalle, the Illinois River is joined by the Vermilion River, and then it flows west past Peru, and Spring Valley. In southeastern Bureau County it turns south at an area known as the "Great Bend", flowing southwest across western Illinois, past Lacon, Henry and downtown Peoria, the chief city on the river.

tag: p

text: South of Peoria, the Illinois River goes by East Peoria and Creve Coeur, and then Pekin, Illinois, in Tazewell County, Illinois. It is then joined by the Mackinaw River and then passes through the Chautauqua National Wildlife Refuge. Across from Havana, the Illinois is joined by the Spoon River coming from Fulton County, Illinois, and across from Browning, it is joined by the Sangamon River, which passes through the state capital, Springfield, Illinois. The La Moine River flows into it approximately five miles (8 kilometers) southwest of Beardstown, which is south of Peoria and Pekin and north of Lincoln and Springfield.

text: Near the confluence of the Illinois with the La Moine River, it turns south, flowing roughly parallel to the Mississippi across southwestern Illinois. Macoupin Creek joins the Illinois on the border between Greene and Jersey counties, approximately 15 miles (24 km) upstream from the confluence with the Mississippi.

text: For the last 20 miles (32 km) of its course, the Illinois is separated from the Mississippi River by only about five miles, by a peninsula of land that makes up Calhoun County. The Illinois joins the Mississippi near Grafton, approximately 25 miles (40 km) northwest of downtown St. Louis and about 20 miles upstream from the confluence of the Missouri River and the Mississippi.

text: Geology[edit]

text: South of Hennepin, the Illinois River is following the ancient channel of the Mississippi River.  The Illinoian Stage, about 300,000 to 132,000 years ago, blocked the Mississippi near Rock Island, diverting it into its present channel. After the glacier melted, the Illinois River flowed into the ancient channel. The Hennepin Canal roughly follows the ancient channel of the Mississippi upstream of Rock Island.

text: The modern channel of the Illinois River was shaped in a matter of days by the Kankakee Torrent. During the melting of the Wisconsin Glacier about 10,000 years ago, a lake formed in present-day Indiana, comparable to one of the modern Great Lakes. The lake formed behind the terminal moraine of a substage of that glacier.[7] Melting ice to the north eventually raised the level of the lake so that it overflowed the moraine. The dam burst, and the entire volume of the lake was released in a very short time, perhaps a few days.

text: Because of the manner of its formation, the Illinois River runs through a deep canyon with many rock formations. It has an "underutilized channel", one far larger than would be needed to contain any conceivable flow in modern times.

text:
Flooding along the Illinois River

Late October 2009 (before the flood).

Early November 2009 (during the flood).

text: History[edit]

text: The Illinois River valley was one of the strongholds of the Illinois Confederation of Native Americans. The French first met the natives here in 1673.  The first European settlement in the state of Illinois was the Jesuit mission founded in 1675 by Father Jacques Marquette on the banks of the Illinois across from Starved Rock at the Grand Village of the Illinois. Marquette wrote of the river, “We have seen nothing like this river that we enter, as regards its fertility of soil, its prairies and woods; its cattle, elk, deer, wildcats, bustards, swans, ducks, parroquets, and even beaver. There are many small lakes and rivers. That on which we sailed is wide, deep, and still, for 65 leagues."[8]

text: In 1680, René-Robert Cavelier, Sieur de La Salle built the first fort in Illinois, Ft. St. Louis, at Starved Rock.  Later it was relocated to the present site of Creve Coeur, near Peoria, where the Jesuits relocated.

text: Interpretation[edit]

text: The Peoria Riverfront Museum contains a gallery, "Illinois River Encounter," that attempts to interpret the museum through an aquarium tank and displays of the river's geology, ecology, social history, engineering, and commercial use.[9]

text: Modern use[edit]

text: From 1905 to 1915, more freshwater fish were harvested from the Illinois River than from any other river in the United States except for the Columbia River. The Illinois River was once a major source of mussels for the shell button industry. Overfishing, habitat loss from heavy siltation, and water pollution have eliminated most commercial fishing except for a small mussel harvest to provide shells to seed pearl oysters overseas. It is commercially fished downstream of the Rt. 89 bridge at Spring Valley. However, an infestation of invasive Asian Carp has crowded out many game fish in the river. [10] The Illinois River is still an important sports fishing waterway with a good sauger fishery.

text: The Illinois forms part of a modern waterway that connects the Great Lakes at Chicago to the Mississippi River.  The waterway was originally established by the building of the Illinois and Michigan Canal that connected the Illinois River to the Chicago River. When the Sanitary District of Chicago later reversed the flow of the Chicago River, the pollution and sewage of the city of Chicago flowed down into the Illinois River. The Illinois and Michigan Canal has since been replaced by the Illinois Waterway, including the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal. River traffic and flood control is managed by eight locks and dams operated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. As of 2011, all locks and dams on this waterway are closed to visitors for security reasons, except the Starved Rock Visitor Center, which offers an excellent interpretation of the entire system.  The waterway is heavily used by barges transporting bulk goods such as grain and oil. It is used in the summer and early fall by tourists in pleasure boats cruising the Great Loop. The Illinois River is an important part of the Great Loop, the circumnavigation of Eastern North America by water.

text: The City of Peoria is developing a long-term plan to reduce combined sewer overflows to the Illinois River, as required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency. During dry weather, sewage flows safely through the city's sewers to the Greater Peoria Sanitation District wastewater treatment plant. However, about 28 times a year, melting snow or rainwater can overwhelm the sewers, causing untreated sewage to overflow into the Illinois River. Peoria was required to examine the sewer overflows and prepare a long-term control plan to meet Clean Water Act requirements and protect the Illinois River. The city had to submit its plan by December 2008 to U.S. EPA and Illinois EPA.[11].  The issue was still under discussion as recently as 2016. [12]

text: In popular culture[edit]

text: The American folk, country, and bluegrass musician John Hartford's song "Long Hot Summer Days", on his 1976 album Mark Twang, is about a man who works on a towboat on the Illinois River.  The chorus of the song includes the lyrics, "For every day I work on the Illinois River / Get a half a day off with pay / Ol' towboat makin' up barges / On a long hot summer day".

text: Cities and towns[edit]

text:
Bath
Beardstown
Browning
Chillicothe
Chicago
Creve Coeur
East Peoria
Florence
Hardin
Havana
Hennepin
Henry
Kampsville
Kingston Mines
LaSalle
Lacon
Liverpool
Marseilles
Meredosia
Morris
Naples
Naplate
North Utica
Oglesby
Ottawa
Pekin
Peoria
Peoria Heights
Peru
Rome
Seneca
Spring Bay
Spring Valley
Valley City


document_title: Knife legislation

question_text: what types of knives are legal in canada

question_tokens: what types of knives are legal in canada

text: Knife legislation

text: Austria[edit]

text: In accordance with the Austrian Arms Act of 1996 (Waffengesetz 1996) it is illegal to buy, import, possess or carry weapons that are disguised as another object or as an object of common use (sword canes, e.g., or knives disguised as ink pens, brush handles or belt buckles).[2] For ordinary knives, however, there are no restrictions or prohibitions based on blade length or opening or locking mechanism.[3]

text: The Arms Act defines weapons as "objects that by their very nature are intended to reduce or eliminate the defensive ability of a person through direct impact", specifically including all firearms.[3] Consequently, certain knives are considered "weapons" in accordance with this definition. Except for firearms, however, which are heavily regulated, such "weapons", including automatic opening lock-blade knives (switchblades), OTF automatic knives, balisongs, and gravity knives[4] are implicitly permitted under the Arms Act, and thus may be bought, possessed and carried by anyone over the age of 18[5] who has not been expressively banned from owning any weapon (Waffenverbot) by the civilian authorities.[6]

text: Belgium[edit]

text: Article 3, §1 of the 2006 Weapons Act[7] lists the switchblade or automatic knife (couteaux à cran d’arrêt et à lame jaillissante), as well as butterfly knives, throwing knives, throwing stars, and knives or blades that have the appearance of other objects (i.e. sword canes, belt buckle knives, etc.) as prohibited weapons.[8] In addition to specifically prohibited knives, the police and local jurisdictions have broad authority to prohibit the carrying or possession of a wide variety of knives, to include carriage inside a vehicle, if the owner cannot establish sufficient legal reason (motif légitime) for doing so, particularly in urban areas or at public events.[9] This discretion extends to even folding knives without a locking blade.[7][9]

text: Bulgaria[edit]

text: Bulgarian weapon law is maintained on a yearly basis. It is called ZOBVVPI (Bulgarian: „Закон за оръжията, боеприпасите, взривните вещества и пиротехническите изделия")[10] and it covers ONLY the possession and usage of firearms (including gas and signal ones), and pellet or BB (Bulgarian: „сачми") pneumatic guns. A state regulation on melee weapons of any kind does not exist, whether knives, swords, bats or electric devices. Neither there is a juridical definition on the terms "melee weapon" or "cold weapon" in any Bulgarian law. Hence it is absolutely legal to possess and carry a knife in Bulgaria without having to procure any reason for doing so. Concealed knife carry is OK, anywhere and anytime. Although there are no restrictions on the possession or carrying of any type of knives or swords, it is not widely accepted or considered appropriate to carry a knife openly in public places such as streets or public buildings, stores or restaurants. In urban areas, expect an instant check and hassle if a policeman sees you to openly carry a larger knife, even if you have legal right to do it. From a society point of view, the open carry of knives in Bulgaria is justified only on rural areas, when fishing or hunting, or when the knife serves as a tool in work activities, such as gardening. Some places like courts, banks, clubs, bars, etc. will deny you the access with any type of weapon (knives included) and most of them don't offer a safekeeping option. It is urban legend in Bulgaria that knives above 10 cm. are illegal to carry on person, so expect the police to try and convince you give up the knife voluntarily, even if such measure is illegal. You should not give up your knife, instead state the purpose of "daily needs", "utility usage" or even "self-defense" for carrying and be clear that you haven't committed any crime. Insist the policeman to cite a law against you carrying a knife in public. Since there isn't any such law in Bulgaria, police most likely will let you keep your knife and send you on your way with a "warning". If they insist or are further misbehaving, ask to contact their superior officer prior to giving up your knife or else you won't see it again. Actually, there are some random city councils which try to limit knife lengths above 10 centimeters (4 inches) with issuing acts, but these acts are all illegal and have no compliance force, because the councils serve only administrative functions and they don't have the jurisdiction to invent or impose laws of any kind.[11] Remember that although very liberal in terms of knives (weapons) possession and carry, compared to many European countries, Bulgaria isn't the place where you can defend yourself with deadly force. If the need for self-defense with a knife ever arises, consider it very carefully. Bulgaria has strong restrictive self-defense laws and a "duty to retreat" is always obligatory. Usually, courts often consider the armed self-defense as "unjustified" based on the Penal Code and the defending side ends up with an effective jail verdict, even if the cause (treat) for initiating self-defense is proven.[12]

text: Canada[edit]

text: The Canadian Criminal Code criminalizes the possession of knives which open automatically. Section 84(1) defines "a knife that has a blade that opens automatically by gravity or centrifugal force or by hand pressure applied to a button, spring or other device attached to or in the handle of the knife" as a prohibited weapon.[13] Only persons who have been granted exemption by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police through the Canadian Firearms Program are allowed to possess (but not acquire) prohibited weapons.

text: If a person is found in unauthorized possession of a prohibited knife by any law enforcement officer, the person is liable to a maximum of 5 years in jail and the weapon being seized. The Crown can then apply to a Provincial Court judge for the weapon to be forfeited and destroyed. The import and export of prohibited weapons is also strictly regulated and enforced by the Canada Border Services Agency.[14]

text: Examples of prohibited knives include:

text:
any knife, including a switchblade, or butterfly knife with a blade that opens automatically by gravity or centrifugal force or by hand pressure applied to a button, spring or other device in or attached to the handle of the knife;
Constant Companion (belt-buckle knife);
finger rings with blades or other sharp objects projecting from the surface;
push daggers.[13][15]

text: Manually-opened or 'one-handed' opening knives, including spring-assisted knives, that do not fall within the categories listed as prohibited weapons definition are legal to own and use,[16] however importation of many of these items has been banned by the CBSA. [17]

text: There is no length restriction on carrying knives within the Criminal Code, but there is a prohibition against carrying a knife if the possessor intends to carry for a purpose dangerous to public peace or for the purpose of committing a criminal offense.[18]

text: China[edit]

text: Due to concerns about potential violence at the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing, China began restricting "dangerous knives", requiring that purchasers register with the government when purchasing these knives. Included in the new restrictions are knives with "blood grooves", lockblade knives, knives with blades measuring over 22 cm (8.6 in) in length, and knives with blades over 15 cm in length also having a point angle of less than 60 degrees.[19] As of January 2011, according to an authorized Leatherman dealer in Beijing all knives with a locking blade are illegal unless they are part of a larger multi-tool like a leatherman.[citation needed] However, many people still carry locking pocket knives especially when camping with no issues. He suggested carrying locking knives in checked luggage on airplanes, and on your person in trains and subways since they could be confiscated if found in a bag. Foreigners are generally given a bit more leeway in China so if a traveler is caught with a small knife there will probably be no prosecution and at most confiscation.[citation needed]

text: Czech Republic[edit]

text: Czech weapon law from the year 2002 concerns firearms only,[20] with no other legislation concerning knives in existence (with the exception of the paragraphs of the penal code penalizing the use of any weapons in criminal offenses). This means there are no restrictions on the possession or carrying of any types of knives or swords, whether openly or in concealed manner.

text: Denmark[edit]

text: This section needs to be updated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (May 2017)

text: In Denmark, fixed-blade knives are legal to own if the blade is no longer than 12 cm (4.75 inches). Blades over this length may only be legally owned if the possessor has a legitimate reason for carrying the knife or a special collector's permit. However, such knives are still generally illegal to carry in public, whether on one's person or in a vehicle, unless transported in such a manner as to prevent ready access by the owner (lockbox, locked trunk, etc.) Folding, non-lock blade knives are legal to carry if the blade length does not exceed 7 cm (2.756 in). Locking knives and knives over 7 cm must be transported in public so as not to allow ready access by the owner. Knives with blades that may be opened with one hand (even if the one-hand opening mechanism has been removed), automatic-opening knives (switchblades), push daggers, gravity knives, disguised knives (belt-buckle knife, sword cane, etc.) and knives with ready access by the wearer (neck or belt knives, boot knives, etc.) are illegal to own or possess. Multi-tools featuring one-hand opening blades are also illegal to own or possess.[9] Owning throwing knives and throwing in private or public is subject to permissions.[21]

text: France[edit]

text: In France, any knife of any blade length with a fixed blade, or a folding blade with a locking system, falls into unregulated Category D weapon (armes de catégorie D en vente libre).[22] Unregulated category D weapons may be legally purchased if over 18 years of age, but they may not be carried on one's person, unless carried "for good reason", for example, as part of the tools of one's profession. If carried in a vehicle, such knives must be placed in a secure, locked compartment not accessible to the vehicle occupants.[9] In addition, French law provides that authorities may classify any knife as a prohibited item depending upon circumstances and the discretion of the police or judicial authorities. Since "reasonable size" knives are merely tolerated in most circumstances, authorities may summarily confiscate it.[23]

text: Germany[edit]

text: German knife law establishes three categories of knives: 1) prohibited knives; 2) knives designated as cutting and thrusting weapons; and 3) other knives. Some knives are additionally classified as restricted-use, in that they may be possessed in the home or business, but may not be carried on the person.[24] In addition, paragraph 42 section 5 of the Weapons Act gives each German state the option in certain areas to enact local regulations prohibiting the carrying of weapons "and any dangerous objects" in so-called "weapons ban" areas for purposes of protecting public safety and order.[24] "Weapons ban" areas have been enacted in Berlin and Hamburg.[24]

text: Prohibited knives[edit]

text: German law prohibits the manufacture, importation, or sale of butterfly knives, gravity knives, and push daggers (palm knives),[25] as well as knives designed to be disguised as another object, such as a sword cane or belt buckle knife.[citation needed]

text: Automatic or switchblade knives are generally prohibited, with certain exceptions based on blade length and number of sharpened edges. Switchblades and automatic knives with telescoping blade opening designs are prohibited. Side-opening automatic knives are also prohibited unless 1) the blade is no longer than 8.5 cm, and 2) the blade is single-edged, i.e. a blade without double edges, such as a stiletto or dagger.[citation needed]

text: Cutting and thrusting weapons[edit]

text: This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (April 2014) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: Knives designated as cutting and thrusting weapons, but not otherwise specifically prohibited may be possessed by persons of 18 years and older. German law defines a cutting and thrusting weapon as any object intended to reduce or eliminate the ability of a person to attack another person or to defend themselves. This includes swords, sabers, daggers, stilettos, and bayonets. For example, as a bayonet is a military weapon intended to injure or kill people, it is regarded as a weapon by the criminal law. In contrast, a machete is regarded as a tool to clear dense vegetation. Knives classed as cutting and thrusting weapons are generally restricted to possession and use on private property, and may not be carried in public or at certain public events.

text: Restricted-use knives[edit]

text: All knives that are not illegal may be legally purchased, owned, and used by anyone on private property. However, some knives are restricted from being carried in public, which is defined as exercising actual control of a restricted-class knife outside the home, business, or private property.[26]

text:
All cutting and thrusting weapons such as daggers, swords, or stilettos (see above 2.)
All folding knives that are locking and have a one-handed opening mechanism (whether automatic, assisted-opening, or manual in nature). A knife that has only one of these two features may be legal to carry (namely provided it does not violate the principles below and above).
All knives with fixed blades over 12.0 cm[27]

text: Restricted-use knives may be carried if transported in a locked, sealed container, or if there is a commonly accepted legitimate purpose for carrying it, such as participation in a historical reenactment, sporting use (i.e. hunting), or as a necessary tool in a trade or business.[27] The desire to defend oneself, or to use the knife as a tool without proof of necessity for its use is ordinarily not considered a legitimate purpose under the law.[27]

text: Greece[edit]

text: It is illegal to carry a knife for use as a weapon in attack or defense. The only general restriction is intended use, not the properties of the knife itself (in particular, there is no restriction of blade length, despite popular belief). However, in practice there will be significant leeway for interpretation for police officers and judges – and much will depend on whether an intended use other than as a weapon can be argued – for which the properties of the knife in question will be very relevant (bad: flick-knife, automated, long blade, neck-knife, tactical). So, carrying a knife that has its main use as a weapon will be illegal. In addition, it is not allowed to carry knives in certain places, such as courtrooms, to football matches, etc. Carrying knives is generally very unusual in towns, but not in the countryside.

text: "Article 1. Meaning of terms, applicability

text: § 2. Objects that offer themselves [είναι πρόσφορα] to attack or defense are also considered weapons. In particular:

text: b) Knives of all sorts, except those where ownership is justified by use in the home, profession or education, or art, hunting, fishing or other similar uses."

text: The remaining sections refer to: a) sprays and electro-shockers, c) knuckle dusters, clubs, nunchakus, etc., d) flame throwers or chemical sprays, e) fishing spear-guns.

text: No license is needed for import, trade or carrying of knives for these uses (Art 7, 5).

text: See also the constitutional court decision 1299/2008 [28] where the intended use of the weapon found in the car of two criminals is the point of discussion.

text: A useful article from a hunting journal (in Greek).[29]

text: Hong Kong[edit]

text: Under the Weapons Ordinance (HK Laws. Chap 217), certain knives are designated as 'prohibited weapons', including:

text:
Gravity knife
Knuckleduster whether spiked or not and with or without blade
Any bladed or pointed weapon designed to be used in a fashion whereby the handle is held in a clenched fist and the blade or point protrudes between the fingers of the fist
Any knife the blade of which is exposed by a spring or other mechanical or electric device

text: Possession of prohibited weapon is illegal under section 4 of the ordinance and offender is liable to a fine and to imprisonment for 3 years.[30] Any Police officers or Customs officers can seize and detain any prohibited weapon. Once convicted, the weapon is automatically forfeited to the government and can then be disposed of by the Commissioner of Police.[31]

text: Hungary[edit]

text: Carrying a knife with blade length over 8 centimetres (3.1 in) is prohibited in public places in Hungary unless justified by sport, work or everyday activity. Automatic Knives, throwing stars and "French knives" are prohibited regardless of blade length and may be sold only to members of the army, law enforcement and the national security agency. Violation may be punished with a fine up to 50000 HUF. Possession at home and transportation in secure wrapping is allowed for everyone.[32]

text: Any non-bladed weapon that is used to "increase the strength of a punch" is illegal to carry (batons, knuckel dusters, nunchakus etc.).[citation needed]

text: Japan[edit]

text: Any fixed knife containing a blade length of 15 cm or more requires permission from the prefectural public safety commission in order to possess. Permission requirements also apply to any type of pocket knife over 6 cm (including Automatic Knives), spears over 15 cm in blade length, and Japanese halberds.[33] All knives with a blade length over 8 cm are prohibited from being carried, under a crime law,[34] with an exception for carrying for duty or other justifiable reasons. Possession is considered a petty crime and is not usually punishable by prison time. However, in cases where assault occurs with the knife, there is a penalty of up to 2 years prison or up to a ¥300000 fine. Folding knives with a blade length less than 8 cm (such as Swiss Army knives) are permitted, while SAK with a lock blade are prohibited from being carried.

text: Latvia[edit]

text: Latvian legislation "Law On the Handling of Weapons" defines knives as:

text: and prohibits

text: Lithuania[edit]

text: According to Lithuanian law it is legal to possess and carry most types of knives. This includes hunting knives, pocket knives, multi-tools, survivor knives, balisongs etc. as knives are not considered weapons. The only exception are switchblades. It is illegal to carry or possess a switchblade if it meets one of the following criteria: the blade is longer than 8.5 cm; the width in the middle of the blade is less than 14% of its total length; the blade is double sided.[36][37]

text: Netherlands[edit]

text: As of 2011 in the Netherlands a new law prohibits ownership or possession of the following knives, whether kept at home or not: Stilettos, switchblades, folding knives with more than one cutting edge, throwing knives, folding knives with an overall length of more than 28 cm when open, butterfly (balisong) or gravity knives, disguised knives (belt knife, sword cane, etc.) and push daggers.[dead link][9] Also, it is illegal to carry a fixed-blade knife with more than one cutting edge, though such a knife may be kept at home for collector purposes.[dead link][9]

text: In addition to national laws, each Dutch city and urban district has the right to prohibit carrying of any knife that can potentially be used as a weapon in certain "no-go" areas.[dead link][9] Normally a "no-go" area includes all built-up urban areas including bars, cafés, concerts, and public gathering places or events.[dead link][9] In public, a knife must be transported in such a manner so that it is not directly usable by the owner, such as storing the knife in a locked case for carrying in a backpack, or placing the locked-up knife in a storage area of a vehicle separate from the passenger compartment.[dead link][9]

text: Norway[edit]

text: According to Norwegian law, one can spend up to 6 months in prison for purposefully bringing a knife or similar sharp tool especially suited for causing bodily harm to a public place, or for helping others do so. The law does not cover knives or other tools worn or used for work, outdoor pursuits or similar reputable purposes. Note that this includes bringing knives in one's car. It is also illegal to buy, own or store switchblade knives, butterfly knives and stilettos.[38]

text: Poland[edit]

text: All kinds of knives are regarded as dangerous tools, but are not considered weapons under Polish law,[39] so no restriction related to weapons apply. The exception is a blade hidden in an object that doesn't look like a weapon (a sword in an umbrella, a dagger in a shoe etc.). It is legal to sell, buy, trade and possess any knives, and Polish law does not prohibit carrying a knife in a public place. However, certain prohibitions in possession of so-called "dangerous tools" may apply during mass events.[40]

text: Russia[edit]

text: Only certain knives are considered "cold weapons" and regulated in Russia, the others are common tools and are entirely unregulated,[41] however using them in a violent manner is considered an "improvised weapon" usage and is an aggravating circumstance when the charges for an aggressive behavior are filed,[42] and the local regulations may prevent bringing of "dangerous objects" to some events or businesses. The key point of knife regulations in Russia lies in the fact that the determination whether the particular knife represent a weapon or an unregulated tool lies entirely within the opinion of a certified expert or an authorized certification board.[43] In practice this means that there's no legal difference between the knife as a tool and as a weapon, and most given examples may be considered either, the only difference being the certificate issued by an authorized body, and any knife having this certificate being explicitly legal. Certifying the knives as a tool isn't difficult and most producers and importers do this, issuing a copy of a certificate with the knife during the sale, for presentation to the police officers in case of an inquiry. However, unauthorized possession, creation, sale and transport of bladed weapons were decriminalized in 2001 and is now only a civil offence, carrying the penalty between 500 and 2000 ($15 to $60) roubles and/or a ban on a bladed weapon possession for 6 months to a year.[44] For the knives considered weapons the law forbids only the throwing knives, and the automatic and gravity knives with the blades longer than 9 cm (the shorter blades are allowed, providing the owner having the relevant permission).[45]

text: Serbia[edit]

text: The "Weapons and Munitions law" article 2. lists different types of weapons.[46] It states that: "melee weapons, brass knuckles, dagger, kama, saber, bayonet and other items whose primary purpose is offense" are considered weapons. Most knives are therefore considered tools and technically legal to possess and carry. However, since any knife could be used a melee weapon and the law doesn't differentiate between particular types it is up to the authorities to determine the intent of the individual in possession of the knife and whether there is a "good reason" to do so. Thus fixed blade knives are considered appropriate for particular professions or when hunting and fishing, but will likely be treated as a weapon in an urban environment. Switchblades, butterfly knives, blades concealed in everyday objects are usually treated as weapons and assisted opening knives may also fall into that category. The appearance of the knife (how aggressive it appears), the length (although there is no legal limit on length), the location where it was carried (large gatherings, schools, public buildings etc.) and the demeanor of the person carrying the knife all factor into the decision on whether the law has been broken. Purchase, possession and carry of a melee weapon is classified as a misdemeanor, subject to a fine of up to 10000 RSD or up to 60 days imprisonment ("Weapons and Munitions law", article 35.[47] In practice the less akin to a weapon the knife appears, and if carried and used with "good judgment" the lesser the likelihood of legal consequences.

text: Slovakia[edit]

text: Carrying a knife in Slovakia is not explicitly prohibited nor are there any prohibited types of knives. However Act No. 372/1990 Offences Act[48] states in paragraph 47 that carrying of a "cold weapon" such as knife, dagger, or sabre on public places is a non-criminal offense to public safety if, from the circumstances of the case or the behaviour of the person, it can be concluded that these weapons can be used for violence or threats of violence. It is up to the individual assessment of any single situation by a policeman whether carrying of such a weapon can lead to violence. This offense can be penalized with maximum 500 EUR. An example of such a situation is visibly carrying of a knife in crowded public places, public meetings, etc.

text: Spain[edit]

text: In Spain there are stringent laws proscribing the carrying of armas blancas, or fighting knives, and prohibiting the manufacture, sale, possession or use of certain knives classified as prohibited weapons.[49][50] Armas blancas and other sharp-bladed instruments or cutting tools may be freely purchased and owned provided they are not on the list of prohibited weapons, are not purchased or possessed by minors, are kept at home for the exclusive purpose of a collection, and are not transported on the public roads.[49] It is against the law generally to carry, display or use any kind of knife in public, especially knives with pointed blades, unless one is on one's own property or is working or engaged in a legitimate sporting activity requiring the use of such a knife.[50]

text: The list of prohibited weapons is found in Anexo I – Armas prohibidas of the Real Decreto 137/1993 Por El Que Se Aprueba EL Reglamento de Armas, which prohibits the manufacture, importation, distribution, sale, possession and use of sword canes, automatic knives (switchblades), as well as daggers of any type.[50] Knives with a double-edged, pointed-tip blade 11 cm (4.33 inches) or less in length (measured from the forward end of the handle to the tip of the blade) are considered to be armas blancas, which may be owned, but not carried in public.[50] The law also prohibits the marketing, advertising, sale, possession, and use of folding knives with a blade length exceeding 11 cm (4.33 in.), measured from the bolster or top of the handle to the tip of the blade.[50] Certain exceptions to the list of prohibited knives exist for legitimate knife collections and historical artifacts registered with the Guardia Civil for possession exclusively at one's own home.[50]

text: Civilians are prohibited from possessing knives, machetes, and other bladed weapons officially issued to the police, military, and other official authorities without a special license.[50] Sale of such weapons requires the presentation of an official arms license duly certifying the identity and status of the person entitled to possess such weapons.[50]

text: Sweden[edit]

text: This section needs to be updated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (July 2017)

text: Swedish law prohibits the carrying of knives in public areas, including schools and vehicles at these areas, if the carrier intends to use the knife as a weapon in the commission of a crime. Examples of legitimate purposes include artisans who use a knife at work, soldiers in uniform carrying a knife, or normal use of a pocket knife. The same law also regulates some other objects that are made to thrust, cut, or that are otherwise intended for crime against life and health. Furthermore, objects that are "particularly" intended for crime against life and health, such as switchblades, shurikens and brass knuckles, are not permitted to be given or sold to anyone under the age of 21.[51] Carrying a weapon for self-defence does not count as a legitimate purpose.[52]

text: United Kingdom[edit]

text: The 1689 Bill of Rights ensured that only Parliament and not the King could restrict the right of the people to bear arms. Over the last 60 years, Parliament has enacted a series of increasingly restrictive laws and acts regarding the possession and use of knives and bladed tools. The United Kingdom (to include England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland) has one of the most comprehensive set of laws of any developed nation restricting most of the rights to import, purchase, possess, sell, and carry knives.[53][54] Ambulance service data gathered in 2009 suggests a slow increase in knife crime incidents in the UK although the overall rate remains low.[55]

text: England and Wales[edit]

text: Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1959[edit]

text: The Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1959 (amended 1961) (ROWA), prohibits the importation, sale, hire, lending, or gift of certain types of knives in England, Wales, and Scotland as of 13 June 1959[56][57] under Section 1:

text: Subsection 2 also makes it illegal to import knives of this type as of 13 June 1959.[56] The above legislation criminalizes the conduct of the original owner or transferor of an automatic-opening or gravity knife, not the new owner or transferee; in addition, the statute does not criminalize possession of such knives other than possession for the purpose of sale or hire. It is therefore not illegal per se to merely possess such a knife, though the difficulties of acquiring one without violating the statute makes it (almost) impossible to obtain one without either committing or abetting an offence.

text: Criminal Justice Act 1988[edit]

text: The Criminal Justice Act 1988 mainly relates to carrying knives in public places, Section 139 being the most important:

text: The definition of "public place" is unsettled, but can loosely be defined as anywhere the public have a legitimate right to be whether this access is paid for or not, which could include any populated area within the England and Wales, including one's motor vehicle, which is defined by law as a 'public place' unless parked on private property. In a remote or otherwise unpopulated area, a public place could include: 1) an organised wilderness gathering or event; 2) a National Park; 3) Forestry Commission land that is held open to the public; 4) public footpaths; 5) bridleways; and 6) any area where an individual does not need to ask specific permission to walk, camp, or travel from a landowner.[58]

text: The phrase "good reason or lawful authority" in Subsection 4 is intended to allow for "common sense" possession of knives, so that it is legal to carry a knife if there is a bona fide reason to do so. Subsection 5 gives some specific examples of bona fide reasons: a knife for use at work (e.g. a chef's knife), as part of a national costume (e.g. a sgian dubh for Scottish Highland dress), or for religious reasons (e.g. a Sikh Kirpan). However, even these specific statutory exceptions have proven unavailing to knife owners at times.[59] It is important to note that "good reason or lawful authority" exceptions may be difficult to establish for those not using a knife in the course of their trade or profession, but merely because the knife is needed in case of emergency or for occasional utility use.[60][61][62]

text: Although English law insists that it is the responsibility of the prosecution to provide evidence proving a crime has been committed, an individual must provide evidence to prove that they had a "good reason or lawful authority" for carrying a knife (if this is the case) upon being detained. While this may appear to be a reversal of the usual burden of proof, technically the prosecution has already proven the case (prima facie) by establishing that a knife was being carried in a public place (see Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 on Knives, etc.; New powers to tackle gun and knife crime)

text: As the burden of proving "good reason or lawful authority" lies with the defendant, it is likely that an individual detained and searched by the police will need to prove the following (sometimes known as the THIS list): Has THIS person got permission; to use THIS article (knife); for THIS use; on THIS land; and by THIS land owner.[58]

text: The special exception which exists in the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Sec. 139) for folding knives (pocket knives) with blades less than 3 inches (76mm) long, is another "common sense" measure accepting that some small knives are carried for general utility; This exemption however only applies to folding knives without a locking mechanism. The wording of the Criminal Justice Act does not mention locking and so the definition of "folding pocket knife" was settled through case law. In the Crown Court appeal of Harris v. DPP (1992)[61] and the Court of Appeal case of R. v Deegan (1998)[63] the ruling that 'folding' was intended to mean 'non-locking' was upheld. As the only higher court in England and Wales to the Court of Appeal is the Supreme Court, the only way the decision in R. v. Deegan could be overturned is by a dissenting ruling by the Supreme Court or by Act of Parliament.[64]

text: Offensive Weapons Act 1996[edit]

text: The Offensive Weapons Act 1996 covers the possession of knives within school premises:

text: The Offensive Weapons Act 1996 imposes an age restriction on the sale of knives:

text: In Scotland, the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 makes it an offence to sell knives to someone under 18 years of age (including any blade, razor blade, any bladed or pointed article, or any item made or adapted for causing personal injury.)

text: Knives Act 1997[edit]

text: The Knives Act 1997 prohibits the sale of combat knives and restricts the marketing of knives as offensive weapons.[66]

text: Prevention of Crime Act 1953[edit]

text: The Prevention of Crime Act 1953 prohibits the possession in any public place of an offensive weapon without lawful authority or reasonable excuse.[67] The term "offensive weapon" is defined as: "any article made or adapted for use to causing injury to the person, or intended by the person having it with him for such use".

text: Under the Prevention of Crime Act, otherwise 'exempt' knives carried for "good reason or lawful authority" may be still deemed illegal if authorities conclude the knife is being carried as an "offensive weapon". In recent years, the Prevention of Crime Act 1953 has been reinterpreted by police and public prosecutors, who have persuaded the courts to minimize exceptions to prosecution on the grounds that the defendant had "lawful authority or reasonable excuse" in order to apply the Act to a wide variety of cases.[68] This new approach now includes prosecution of citizens who have admitted carrying a knife for the sole purpose of self-defence (in the eyes of the law, this is presently viewed as an admission that the defendant intends to use the knife as an "offensive weapon", albeit in a defensive manner, and in otherwise justifiable circumstances).[69] While the onus lies on the officer to prove offensive intent, prosecutors and courts have in the past taken the appearance and the marketing of a particular brand of knife into account when considering whether an otherwise legal knife was being carried as an offensive weapon. In addition, the Knives Act 1997 now prohibits the sale of combat knives and restricts the marketing of knives as offensive weapons. A knife which is marketed as "tactical", "military", "special ops", etc. could therefore carry an extra liability.

text: Scotland[edit]

text: In Scotland, the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995 prevents the carrying of offensive weapons as well as pointed or bladed articles in a public place without lawful authority or reasonable excuse. Defences exist to a charge of possessing a bladed or pointed article in a public place when carried for use at work, as part of a national costume or for religious reasons. As in England and Wales, an exception is allowed for folding pocket knives which have a blade of less than 3 Inches (7.62 cm)[70]

text: Other relevant Scotland knife legislation includes the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons Act) (Scotland) Order 2005, which bans sword canes, push daggers, butterfly (balisong knives), throwing stars, knives that can defeat metal detectors, and knives disguised as other objects, and the Police, Public Order and Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2006, which makes it an offence to sell a knife, knife blade, or bladed or pointed object to a person under eighteen years of age, unless the person is sixteen or older and the knife or blade is "designed for domestic use." In 2007, the passage of the Custodial Sentences and Weapons (Scotland) Act 2007 allowed exemption from criminal liability under section 141 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 for selling a prohibited offensive weapon if the sale was made for purposes of theatrical performances and of rehearsals for such performances, the production of films (as defined in section 5B of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988), or the production of television programmes (as defined in section 405(1) of the Communications Act 2003).

text: Further legislation in Scotland, known as the Custodial Sentences and Weapons (Scotland) Act 2007, is now in effect (certain parts of this Act came into force on 10 September 2007). This legislation amends the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 and makes it compulsory to possess a local authority license to sell knives, swords and blades (other than those designed for 'domestic use'), or to sell any sharply pointed or bladed object "which is made or adapted for use for causing injury to the person." Any dealer in non-domestic knives will be required to hold a ‘knife dealer’s licence’.

text: Northern Ireland[edit]

text: The laws restricting knife ownership, use, possession and sale are nearly identical to the laws of Scotland and the rest of the UK, though contained in different acts.[71] In 2008, in response to a surge in public concern over knife-related crimes, Northern Ireland doubled the prison sentence for persons convicted of possessing a knife deemed to be an offensive weapon in a public place to four years' imprisonment, and added an evidential presumption in favour of prosecution for possession of a knife.[72]

text: United States[edit]

text: Federal laws[edit]

text: Under the Switchblade Knife Act of 1958 (amended 1986, codified at 15 U.S.C. §§1241–1245), switchblades and ballistic knives are banned from interstate shipment, sale, or importation, or possession within the following: any territory or possession of the United States, i.e. land belonging to the U.S. federal government; Indian lands (as defined in section 1151 of title 18); and areas within the maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the federal government, with the exception of federal, state law enforcement agencies and the military.[73] In addition, federal laws may prohibit the possession or carrying of any knife on certain federal properties such as courthouses or military installations. U.S. federal laws on switchblades do not apply to the possession or sale of switchblade knives within a state's boundaries; the latter is regulated by the laws of that particular state, if any.

text: Occasional disputes over what constitutes a switchblade knife under federal law has occasionally resulted in U.S. Customs seizures of knives from U.S. importers or manufacturers.[74][75] In one case the seizure of a shipment of Columbia River Knife & Tool knives resulted in an estimated US$1 million loss to the company before the shipment was released.[76][77][78]

text: Amendment 1447 to the Switchblade Knife Act (15 U.S.C. §1244), signed into law as part of the FY2010 Homeland Security Appropriations Bill on October 28, 2009, provides that the Act shall not apply to spring-assist or assisted-opening knives (i.e. knives with closure-biased springs that require physical force applied to the blade to assist in opening the knife).[79]

text: State and local laws[edit]

text: Each American state also has laws that govern the legality of carrying weapons, either concealed or openly, and these laws explicitly or implicitly cover various types of knives. Some states go beyond this, and criminalize mere possession of certain types of knives. Other states prohibit the possession and/or the concealed carrying of knives that feature blade styles or features sufficient to transform them into "dangerous weapons"[80][81] or "deadly weapons", i.e. knives either optimized for lethality against humans or designed for and readily capable of causing death or serious bodily injury.[80][82] These frequently include knives with specific blade styles with a historical connection to violence or assassination, including thrusting knives such as the dirk, poignard, and stiletto, the bowie knife, and double-edged knives with crossguards designed for knife fighting such as the dagger.[80][83] Some states make the carrying or possession of any dangerous or deadly weapon with intent to unlawfully harm another a crime.[80]

text: Historical Origin[edit]

text: The origin of many knife laws, particularly in the southern states, comes from attempts by early state legislatures to curtail the practice of knife fighting and dueling with large knives such as the bowie knife, which was commonly carried as an item of personal defense prior to the invention of the revolver.[84] In Alabama,[85] Mississippi,[86] New Mexico,[87][88] and Virginia,[80] the carrying on one's person of large and lengthy fighting knives capable of causing grievous wounds such as the Bowie Knife[89] is prohibited by statute,[80][90] originally in the interest of controlling or eliminating the then-common practice of "dueling", a term which had degenerated from a rarely used social custom into a generalized description for any knife or gun fight between two contestants.[83][91] In many jurisdictions, a local tradition of using knives to settle differences or for self-defense[83][92] resulted in the enactment of statutes that restricted the size and length of the knife and particularly, the length of its blade.[83]

text: After the Civil War, many restrictions on knife and even gun ownership were imposed by state, county, and city laws and ordinances that were clearly based on fear of weapon possession by certain racial groups, particularly African-American and Hispanic Americans.[93][94] In some states, so-called "Black Codes" adopted after the Civil War required blacks to obtain a license before carrying or possessing firearms or Bowie knives.[94] The governments of Texas and other former states of the Confederacy, many of which had recognized the right to carry arms such as Bowie knives openly before the Civil War,[95] passed new restrictions on both gun and knife possession and use.[94][96] In some cases, these laws were directed at freed slaves and other minorities; in other cases, by reconstruction legislatures anxious to disarm rebellious militias and groups seeking to disenfranchise African-American and other minorities.[97] The April 12, 1871 law passed by the Texas' Reconstruction legislature is typical, and is the ancestor of the present law restricting knife possession and use in Texas:

text: Any person carrying on or about his person, saddle, or in his saddle-bags, any pistol, dirk, dagger, sling-shot, sword-cane, spear, brass knuckles, bowie knife, or any other kind of knife, manufactured or sold, for the purpose of offense or defense, unless he has reasonable grounds for fearing an unlawful attack on his person, and that such ground of attack shall be immediate and pressing; or unless having or carrying the same on or about his person for the lawful defense of the State, as a militiaman in actual service, or as a peace officer or policeman, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor..."[97]

text: While most gun restrictions were eventually repealed, many knife laws remained in effect in the South. In Texas, this was largely explained by the presence of large numbers of Tejanos.[98] By 1870, Texas whites of the day had almost universally and exclusively adopted the revolver for self-defense, while Tejanos, steeped in the blade culture (el legado Andaluz) of Mexico and Spain and generally without the means to purchase handguns, continued to carry knives.[94] Thus while local and state Texas gun laws and ordinances were gradually relaxed or eliminated during the late 1800s, the old prohibitions against bowie knives, daggers, dirks, and other long-bladed knives remained on the books, since they served to disarm and control a minority group viewed as engaging in lawless behaviors and violence without legal justification.[93][98] The Texas law remained on the books for almost 150 years, until modified in 2017 to allow carrying these weapons with some restrictions.[99]

text: Interpreting current state laws[edit]

text: Many of today's state criminal codes restricting knife use and ownership have been amended repeatedly over the years rather than rewritten to remove old classifications and definitions that are largely a historical legacy, a process that frequently results in illogical, confusing, and even conflicting provisions. Thus in Arkansas, a state in which knife fights using large, lengthy blades such as the Bowie and Arkansas Toothpick were once commonplace,[83][100] a state statute made it illegal for someone to "carry a knife as a weapon",[101] specifying that any knife with a blade 3.5 inches or longer constituted prima facie evidence that the knife was being carried as a weapon, yet allowed a complete exemption to the law when "upon a journey".[102]

text: While Arkansas eventually repealed its archaic criminal knife possession law in its entirety,[103] other states still periodically amend archaic criminal codes that penalize both historic and present-day behavior involving knife use and ownership; these patchwork statutes can result in lengthy legal disputes over legislative intent and definitions.[104][105] As one example, Indiana law makes it illegal to possess a 'dagger', 'dirk', 'poniard', 'stiletto', 'switchblade', or 'gravity knife' on school property, or to possess any knife on school property "capable of being used to inflict cutting, stabbing, or tearing wounds" if that knife "is intended to be used as a weapon", but provides for a criminal penalty only if a person "recklessly, knowingly, or intentionally" possesses such a knife on school property.[106] The statute thus requires 1) an examination of the knife and the legislative history of the statute; 2) expert testimony on the individual characteristics of historic knife designs to determine whether the knife in question fits within one of the six specified categories of knife; 3) a determination as to whether the blade can cause a "cutting, stabbing, or tearing wound"; 4) a determination as to what degree of injury constitutes a "wound", and 5) two separate determinations of the defendant's intent by the fact finder – before guilt or innocence may be adjudged.[107]

text: Some states prohibit the possession of a folding knife with a quick-opening mechanism such as a gravity knife, butterfly knife, balisong, or switchblade.[80] Other states may impose no restrictions at all,[108] while many allow possession with some restrictions (age, carrying on one's person, carrying concealed, carrying while a convicted felon, prohibited possessor, or while in the commission of a serious offense, etc.)[80]

text: The continual advent of new knife designs, such as assisted-opening knives can complicate issues of legality, particularly when state laws have not been carefully drafted to clearly define the new design and how it is to be classified within existing law. This omission has led in the past to cases in which state courts have substituted their own understanding of knife design to interpret legislative intent when applying statutes criminalizing certain types of knives.[80][109]

text: In 2014, attention was brought by many newspapers and media outlets to 1950s era legislation leading to many arrests and convictions for possession of the loosely defined gravity knife.[110]

text: City, County, and local laws[edit]

text: City, county, and local jurisdictions (to include sovereign Indian nations located within a state boundary) may enact their own criminal laws or ordinances in addition to the restrictions contained in state laws, which may be more restrictive than state law.[80] Virtually all states and local jurisdictions have laws that restrict or prohibit the possession or carrying of knives in some form or manner in certain defined areas or places such as schools, public buildings, courthouses, police stations, jails, power plant facilities, airports, or public events.[80]

text: Local or city ordinances are sometimes drafted to include specific classes of people not covered by the state criminal codes, such as individuals carrying folding knives with locking blades primarily for use as weapons.[80] For example, a San Antonio, Texas city ordinance makes it unlawful for anyone to knowingly carry within city limits "on or about his person" any folding knife with a blade less than 5.5 inches long with a lock mechanism that locks the blade upon opening.[80] This ordinance is designed to work in tandem with the Texas state statute[111] making illegal the carrying of knives with blades longer than 5.5 inches.[112] The San Antonio ordinance allows police to charge persons carrying most types of lock blade knives without good cause with a criminal misdemeanor violation, allowing police to remove the knife from the possession of the offender, while providing exemptions from the ordinance designed to protect certain classes of people the city assumes to pose no threat to public order.[113] Occasionally, city and county ordinances conflict with state law. In one example, the city of Portland, Oregon initially passed a city ordinance banning all pocket knives,[citation needed] until the measure was overturned by the Oregon Supreme Court as conflicting with state criminal statutes.


question_text: who sang that what friends are for in jungle book

text: "That's What Friends Are For (The Vulture Song)" is a song in the widely popular Walt Disney film The Jungle Book from 1967. It was sung by a quartet of "mop top" vultures who are making friends with Mowgli, the main character of the film. The song was written by Disney staff songwriters, Robert and Richard Sherman, and sung primarily by J. Pat O'Malley, Lord Tim Hudson, Digby Wolfe, and Chad Stuart. Bruce Reitherman and George Sanders both made cameo appearances in the song singing as Mowgli and Shere Khan the tiger, respectively, in different parts. [1] In the soundtrack album, The Mellomen member Bill Lee replaced the unavailable Sanders.[2]

text: Composing[edit]

text: The Shermans were brought onto the film by Walt Disney due to Disney's feeling that the interpretation was keeping too true to the Rudyard Kipling book. In a deliberate effort to keep the score "light", this song as well as the Sherman Brothers' other contributions generally concern darker subject matter than the accompanying music would suggest. In the case of "That's What Friends Are For", the vultures sing in the style of a barbershop quartet, making their song endearing to Mowgli - and that much more dangerous.[1] The lyrics feature many double entendres regarding how the vultures eat other animals.[3] The song was originally conceived as a rock and roll song, sung by the quartet of vultures. The vultures were even designed based on The Beatles, with moptop haircuts and Liverpudlian accents, and would be voiced by the band, which did not come into fruition due to problems with their schedule. During production Disney decided the 1960s style rock would cause the song to be considered dated later, leading "We're Your Friends" to be changed to the barbershop quartet that appears in the film.[4]


document_title: Separate but equal

question_text: who boarded the white car on a train leading to the separate but equal doctrine

text: Separate but equal

text: Origins[edit]

text: The American Civil War (1861–1865) brought slavery in the United States to an end, with the Emancipation Proclamation during the war, and the Thirteenth Amendment shortly after.[3] Following the war, the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution guaranteed equal protection under the law to all citizens, and Congress established the Freedmen's Bureau to assist the integration of former slaves into Southern society. After the end of Reconstruction with the Compromise of 1877, and the withdrawal of federal troops from all Southern states, former slave-holding states enacted various laws to undermine the equal treatment of African Americans, although the Fourteenth Amendment as well as federal Civil Rights laws enacted during reconstruction were meant to guarantee it. However, Southern states contended that the requirement of equality could be met in a way that kept the races separate. Furthermore, the state and federal courts tended to reject the pleas by African Americans that their Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated, arguing that the Fourteenth Amendment applied only to federal, not state, citizenship. This rejection is evident in the Slaughter-House Cases and Civil Rights Cases.

text: After the end of Reconstruction, the federal government adopted a general policy of leaving racial segregation up to the individual states. One example of this policy was the second Morrill Act (Morrill Act of 1890). Before the end of the war, the Morrill Land-Grant Colleges Act (Morrill Act of 1862) had provided federal funding for higher education by each state with the details left to the state legislatures.[4] The 1890 Act implicitly accepted the legal concept of "separate but equal" for the 17 states that had institutionalized segregation.

text: Provided, That no money shall be paid out under this act to any State or Territory for the support and maintenance of a college where a distinction of race or color is made in the admission of students, but the establishment and maintenance of such colleges separately for white and colored students shall be held to be a compliance with the provisions of this act if the funds received in such State or Territory be equitably divided as hereinafter set forth.[5][6]

text: Prior to the Second Morrill Act, 17 states excluded blacks from access to the land grant colleges without providing similar educational opportunities. In response to the Second Morrill Act, 17 states established separate land grant colleges for blacks which are now referred to as public historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs). In fact, some states adopted laws prohibiting schools from educating blacks and whites together, even if a school was willing to do so. (The Constitutionality of such laws was upheld in Berea College v. Kentucky, 211 U.S. 45 (1908).) Under the 'separate but equal doctrine', blacks were entitled to receive the same public services and accommodations such as schools, bathrooms, and water fountains, but states were allowed to maintain different facilities for the two groups. The legitimacy of such laws under the 14th Amendment was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1896 case of Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537. The Plessy doctrine was extended to the public schools in Cumming v. Richmond County Board of Education, 175 U.S. 528 (1899).

text: Although the Constitutional doctrine required equality, the facilities and social services offered to African-Americans were almost always of lower quality than those offered to white Americans; for example, many African American schools received less public funding per student than nearby white schools. In Texas, the state established a state-funded law school for white students without any law school for black students.

text: In 1892, Homer Plessy, who was of mixed ancestry and appeared to be white, boarded an all-white railroad car between New Orleans and Covington, Louisiana. The conductor of the train collected passenger tickets at their seats. When Plessy told the conductor he was 7/8ths white and 1/8th black, he was advised he needed to move to a coloreds-only car. Plessy said he resented sitting in a coloreds-only car and was arrested immediately.

text: One month after his arrest, Plessy appeared in court before Judge John Howard Ferguson. Plessy's lawyer, Albion Tourgee, claimed Plessy’s 13th and 14th amendment rights were violated. The 13th amendment abolished slavery, and the 14th amendment granted equal protection to all under the law.

text: The Supreme Court decision in Plessy v. Ferguson established the phrase "separate but equal". The ruling required "railway companies carrying passengers in their coaches in that State to provide equal, but separate, accommodations for the white and colored races".[7][unreliable source?] Accommodations provided on each railroad car were required to be the same as those provided on the others. Separate railroad cars could be provided. The railroad could refuse service to passengers who refused to comply, and the Supreme Court ruled this did not infringe upon the 13th and 14th amendments.

text: The "separate but equal" doctrine applied to railroad cars and to schools, voting rights, and drinking fountains. Segregated schools were created for students, as long as they followed "separate but equal". The majority of all black schools received old textbooks, used equipment, and poorly prepared or trained teachers.[8] A study conducted by the American Psychological Association found that black students were emotionally impaired when segregated at a young age.[9] State voting right restrictions, such as literacy tests and poll taxes, created an environment that made it almost impossible for blacks to vote. This era also saw separate drinking fountains in public areas.

text: The "Separate but Equal" doctrine was eventually overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, although the implementation of the changes this implied was long, contentious, and sometimes violent. (See Massive resistance and Southern Manifesto.) Modern legal doctrine interprets the 14th amendment to prohibit explicit segregation on the basis of race.

text: Rejection[edit]

text: This section  possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (March 2014) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: The repeal of such restrictive laws, generally known as Jim Crow laws, was a key focus of the Civil Rights Movement prior to 1954. In Sweatt v. Painter, the Supreme Court addressed a legal challenge to the doctrine by a student seeking admission to a state-supported law school in Texas. Because Texas did not have a law school for blacks, the lower court delayed the case until Texas could create one. However, the Supreme Court ordered that the student be admitted to the white law school on the grounds that the separate school failed to qualify as being "equal", both because of quantitative differences in facilities and intangible factors, such as its isolation from most of the future lawyers with whom its graduates would interact. The court held that, when considering graduate education, intangibles must be considered as part of "substantive equality". The same day, the Supreme Court in McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents ruled that Oklahoma segregation laws which required a graduate student working on a Doctor of Education degree to sit in the hallway outside the classroom door did not qualify as "separate but equal". These cases ended "separate but equal" in graduate and professional education.

text: In Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954), attorneys for the NAACP referred to the phrase "equal but separate" used in Plessy v. Ferguson as a custom de jure racial segregation enacted into law. The NAACP, led by the soon-to-be first black Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, was successful in challenging the constitutional viability of the separate but equal doctrine, and the court voted to overturn sixty years of law that had developed under Plessy. The Supreme Court outlawed segregated public education facilities for blacks and whites at the state level. The companion case of Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 outlawed such practices at the Federal level in the District of Columbia. The court held:

text: We conclude that, in the field of public education, the doctrine of "separate but equal" has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom the actions have been brought are, by reason of the segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment.

text: Although Brown overturned the doctrine of separate but equal with respect to institutions of public education, it would be almost ten more years before the Civil Rights Act of 1964 would prohibit private discrimination in facilities, such as transportation and hotels, that were considered public accommodations. Additionally, in 1967 under Loving v. Virginia, the United States Supreme Court declared Virginia's anti-miscegenation statute, the "Racial Integrity Act of 1924", unconstitutional, and invalidated all anti-miscegenation laws in the United States. Although federal legislation prohibits racial discrimination in college admissions, the historically black colleges and universities continue to teach student bodies that are 75% to 90% African American.[10] This however does not necessarily indicate racial discrimination within college admissions in those schools when factors such as student preference are taken into account.[citation needed] In 1975, Jake Ayers Sr. filed a lawsuit against Mississippi, stating that they gave more financial support to the predominantly white public colleges. The state settled the lawsuit in 2002, directing $503 million to three historically black colleges over 17 years.[11]