Case Concerning the Payment in Gold of Brazilian Federal Loans Contracted in France (Brazil/France)

2000 ◽  
pp. 91-93
Keyword(s):  
Federal Loans

scholarly journals The Eighth Year of The Permanent Court of International Justice

1930 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-51
Author(s):  
Manley O. Hudson
Keyword(s):  
International Justice ◽  
International Commission ◽  
Territorial Jurisdiction ◽  
History Of ◽  
Federal Loans

During the year 1929, the Permanent Court of International Justice held two sessions, and handed down three judgments and three formal orders. The sixteenth (extraordinary) session of the court began on May 13, 1929, and ended on July 12, 1929; and the seventeenth (ordinary) session began on July 8, 1929, and ended on September 10, 1929. At the sixteenth session, the court gave an order in the “ Case Concerning the Denunciation by China of the Treaty of November 2, 1865, between China and Belgium” ; an order in the “ Case Concerning the Factory at Chorzow (Indemnities)” ; a judgment (No. 14) in the “ Case Concerning the Payment of Various Serbian Loans Issued in France” ; and a judgment (No. 15) in the “ Case Concerning the Payment in Gold of the Brazilian Federal Loans Issued in France.” At the seventeenth session, it gave an order in the “ Case of the Free Zones of Upper Savoy and the District of Gex,” and a judgment (No. 16) in the “ Case Relating to the Territorial Jurisdiction of the International Commission of the River Oder.” In addition to these activities, extensions of its jurisdiction and changes in the court's structure, which have been previsaged, make the year notable in the history of the court.

Education

Getting By ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 429-520
Author(s):  
Helen Hershkoff ◽  
Stephen Loffredo
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Educational Opportunity ◽  
Educational Opportunities ◽  
Public Schooling ◽  
Equal Protection Clause ◽  
Low Income Children ◽  
Federal Constitution ◽  
Federal Loans

This chapter discusses state and federal laws that affect educational opportunity for poor and low-income children and adults. The federal Constitution does not guarantee a right to education. Instead, the provision of public schooling is a state responsibility, and the quality of public education varies considerably based on the wealth of the community in which a public school is located. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the Equal Protection Clause does not require states to provide equal educational opportunities to students from low-wealth communities that on a par with those in schools with greater resources. The result is an educational system characterized by disparities and inequalities—rather than driving children forward, public schools in some disadvantaged neighborhoods serve as a conduit in a school-to-prison pipeline, with highly racialized impacts. The chapter discusses how the education of poor and low-income children is affected by residency requirements, truancy laws, punitive disciplinary policies, school fees, and the absence of state-funded programs for toddlers too young to attend kindergarten. Congress has enacted programs designed to supplement educational opportunities for students who are poor or from low-income households, and the chapter discusses some of them, starting with preschool through to vocational training opportunities and federal loans and grants to attend college. These programs, although important, are largely indifferent to the democratic benefits of racially integrated schools and do not go far enough in ensuring every child a free, quality education as a strong foundation for development and growth. The chapter also discusses how student debt has become a barrier to social mobility, and some of the protections available for students unable to pay their college loans.

Navigating the Financial Aid Process: Borrowing Outcomes among First-Generation and Non-First-Generation Students

2017 ◽  
Vol 671 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fernando Furquim ◽  
Kristen M. Glasener ◽  
Meghan Oster ◽  
Brian P. McCall ◽  
Stephen L. DesJardins
Keyword(s):  
Financial Aid ◽  
Postsecondary Education ◽  
First Generation ◽  
Student Loans ◽  
Student Characteristics ◽  
Generational Status ◽  
Financial Resources ◽  
First Generation Students ◽  
Federal Loans ◽  
Student Indebtedness

A growing number and proportion of students rely on student loans to assist with the costs of postsecondary education. Yet little is known about how first-generation students use federal loans to finance their education. In this article, we examine each of the decisions that culminate in student indebtedness: the decision to apply for aid, whether to borrow, and how much to borrow. We find significant differences by generational status at each step of the student borrowing process. First-generation students are more likely to apply for financial aid, borrow, and take out larger loans than their peers, after controlling for a rich set of covariates for costs and financial resources. We find that student characteristics cannot fully explain these observed differences in borrowing outcomes across generations.

Cities seek low cost federal loans

1958 ◽  
Vol 47 (7) ◽  
pp. 350-353
Author(s):  
Jackson Phillips
Keyword(s):  
Low Cost ◽  
Federal Loans

The Central Pacific Railroad and the Railroad Land Grant Controversy

1975 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 552-566 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heywood Fleisig
Keyword(s):  
Land Grant ◽  
Land Grants ◽  
Central Pacific ◽  
The Public ◽  
Political Debates ◽  
Government Aid ◽  
Pacific Railroad ◽  
Federal Loans

To the public of the 1860's, federal loans and land grants to the pioneer Pacific railroads represented aid necessary to secure an economically and politically desirable technological feat; to the public of the 1870's they represented plunder. Scandal, hinted before the driving of the legendary Golden Spike in 1869, sporadically dominated the national political debates of the 1870's and the 1880's. The issue subsided by the 1900's, leaving only a residual popular impression of ample government aid to railroads. Among professional historians, the debate was revived in the mid-1940's by Robert S. Henry's revisionist article justifying the land grants. The ensuing discussion largely restored the original consensus that the land grants represented excessive subsidization.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document