lawyer who says the eclipse

Did a law professor write that a 2017 solar eclipse was ‘racist?

In August 2017, two right-wing web sites falsely reported that a law professor had written that a 2017 solar eclipse was “racist.”

How is an eclipse removed from a court case?

The eclipse is removed when another (probably a higher level court) makes the law valid again or an amendment is brought to it by way of legislation. In Golak Nath v. State of Punjab (1967) case, the family of Henry and William Golak Nath held over 500 acres of farmland in Jalandhar, Punjab.

Why do eclipsed laws exist?

Such eclipsed laws exist for all post transactions and for the enforcement of the rights acquired and liabilities incurred before the commencement of the Constitution. It is only against the citizens that they remain in a dormant or moribund condition but they remain in operation as against non-citizens who are not entitled to fundamental rights.

What happens when an eclipse is cast on a law?

Hence, an ‘eclipse’ is said to be cast on it. The law just becomes invalid but continues to exist. The eclipse is removed when another (probably a higher level court) makes the law valid again or an amendment is brought to it by way of legislation.

Claim

Law professor Alice Ristroph wrote in the Atlantic magazine that the 2017 solar eclipse, its path, or those who viewed it, were "racist."

Origin

In August 2017, two right-wing web sites falsely reported that a law professor had written that a 2017 solar eclipse was “racist.”

What is the doctrine of eclipse?

Doctrine of Eclipse. The Doctrine of Eclipse says that any law inconsistent with Fundamental Rights is not invalid. It is not dead totally but overshadowed by the fundamental right. The inconsistency (conflict) can be removed by constitutional amendment to the relevant fundamental right so that eclipse vanishes and the entire law becomes valid.

What case held that a post-constitutional law is void from its inception but that a pre

State of Uttar Pradesh , 1959 AIR SC 648, case, the Court held that a post- Constitution law is void from its inception but that a pre-Constitution law having been validly enacted would continue in force so far as non-citizens are concerned after the Constitution came into force.

What was the case in 1951?

In Keshava Madhava Menon v. State of Bombay, 1951 AIR 128, case the petitioner was prosecuted under a press law for publishing a pamphlet without permission. While the prosecution was on, the Constitution commenced and he challenged the act as unconstitutional.

Is the law void in toto?

The law became void not in toto or for all purposes or for all times or for all persons but only “to the extent of such inconsistency”, that is to say, to the extent it became inconsistent with the provisions of Part III which conferred the fundamental rights on the citizens. In Deep Chand v.

Is the Constitutional Eclipse enforceable?

It became enforceable against citizens as well as non-citizens after the constitutional impediment was removed. This law was eclipsed for the time being by the fundamental rights. As soon as the eclipse is removed, the law begins to operate from the date of such removal.

Introduction

Fundamental Rights form the core of our democracy. They play an extremely crucial role in protecting and preserving the liberties as well as adjoining constrights of the people against the infringement of the power delegated by them to the government.

Meaning of Legal Doctrine

Usually, a doctrine is referred to as a rule that is widely applicable and followed in the legal field. Legal doctrines lay the foundation of the study of law as they are extremely significant as they provide a comprehensive way of resolving specific types of legal disputes.

Article 13 of the Indian Constitution

In order to understand the Doctrine of Eclipse, it necessary to study Article 13 of the Constitution of India. Although, the doctrine is only concerned with Clause one, we may look at the entire Article to have a brief understanding of the topic. Article 13 elucidates upon the laws in derogation or inconsistent with Fundamental Rights.

Doctrine Of Eclipse Meaning

When a law is inconsistent with any Fundamental Right, it does not become void ab initio. Instead, the Fundamental Right overshadows such inconsistent law and it remains dead only so far as it continues to remain inconsistent with that particular fundamental right.

Salient Features of Doctrine of Eclipse

The doctrine of eclipse can be applied where the case is concerning a pre-constitutional law/s. If such a law is infringing the aggrieved party’s Fundamental Right, then the party can rightly invoke this doctrine. But if there is an amendment in the Fundamental right itself, then the law in question may continue to be applicable or enforceable.

Case Laws On Doctrine of Eclipse

An extremely important case with regards to the Doctrine of Eclipse is Bhikhaji v. State of Madhya Pradesh. In the aforesaid case, the provisions of C.P. and Berar Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act 1948 authorised the State Government to take up the entire motor transport business in the province to the exclusion of motor transport operators.

Difference Between Doctrine Of Eclipse And Doctrine Of Severability

According to the doctrine of severability, when a provision contravenes with the Fundamental Rights, then only that part which is infringing those rights would be declared void, thus separating such an inconsistent part of law from the consistent parts of that same law.