Impact of Political Uncertainty on Pakistan Stock Exchange: An Event Study Approach

Pakistan is struggling against many problems; out of which political instability and terrorism are crucial problems. These issues hindered the economic growth of the country as well as the confidence of investors. This study has investigated the impact of political events on Pakistan Stock Exchange. This paper uses a standard event study methodology. Data relating to the stock market index has been collected from the website of Pakistan Stock Exchange and relating to political events has been collected from the newspapers of Business Recorder and DAWN. A total of 18 political events was considered in the study out of which 08 events were coded as positive and other 10 were deemed negative. The first day abnormal return, a five-day cumulative abnormal return and ten-day cumulative return was calculated for all of the events. This study found evidence that political events affected the stock market in Pakistan, but their impact is different considering the economic and political implications of these events. Certain events had the strongest impact on the stock market like Nuclear tests for effective defense, the Supreme Court had revoked the Presidential order and Nawaz Sharif had been reinstated, General elections held in the country and the 14th amendment because 14th amendment was related to the elimination of corruption in political parties. Overall, this study laid the foundation to make further explorations into the phenomenon of uncertainty caused by political events in relevance to the stock market in Pakistan.

U.S. Supreme Court in the civil rights era: Deliberative Democracy and its educative institutional role, 1950s–1970s

This article examines the U.S. Supreme Court’s lesser-known educative role as an egalitarian institution within a broader deliberative democratic process. Scholars have argued that the Court’s long asserted power of judicial review, especially in the equal protection and civil rights context, has been an over-reach of the judicial branch’s constitutional authority and responsibilities. Normative and empirical critiques have been centered on the aims of judicial review, and the challenges it poses in American political life. A core issue surrounding these critiques is that Justices are appointed not elected, and thus undermine the principle of majority rule in the U.S. constitutional democratic order. Although these critiques are legitimate in terms of claims about unelected Supreme Court Justices’ seemingly discretionary powers over elected legislative bodies, and the uncertain policy implications of judicial pronouncements on the broader society, there is, nevertheless, a positive application of judicial review as a tool Justices use as part of their educative role overcoming the so-called “counter-majoritarian difficulty.” Through a close reading of oral arguments in Brown vs. Board of Education (1954) and San Antonio vs. Rodriguez (1973)—two landmark cases invoking the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the federal Constitution—the article shows how appointed Justices adjudicate individual cases on appeal and attempt to educate (through an argumentative, reason-based and question-centered process) citizenlitigants and their legal representatives about the importance of equality, fairness and ethical responsibility even prior to rendering final decisions on policy controversies that have broader national social, political and economic implications.

Citizenship in the United States: A Historical Assessment of a Present-Day Contretemps

In late 2015, debate among many US Republican presidential candidates focused on immigration policy, with one candidate who was hostile to America’s immigration policy, opining that the 14th Amendment’s definition of citizenship may be unconstitutional. This was the view of the GOP candidate who eventually won the Presidency. The question of citizenship, and the linked issue of rights, was contested in the early republic. Much of the quarrel revolved around the issue of slavery. At least three competing notions of citizenship and rights gained traction by the first half of the 19th century: one argued for citizenship and rights only for whites; another urged that “popular sovereignty” should determine rights and citizenship. A third insisted on an inclusive definition of citizenship. By 1868, the 14th Amendment underscored the latter view. But, as current affairs in America show, the bickering persists, often using arguments similar to those found in the early republic’s squabbles. This essay explores the debate among the viewpoints articulated during the first half of the 19th century and seeks to draw out counsel for our own time.

WHAT'S THE HARM IN POLYGAMY? MULTICULTURAL TOLERATION AND WOMEN'S EXPERIENCE OF PLURAL MARRIAGE

The last decade has seen the publication in North America of a plethora of academic books and articles about polygamy. The most important texts on the subject, however, are two court rulings evaluating the constitutionality of criminal prohibitions against the practice of polygamy. Informed by and in dialogue with this academic discourse, these courts arrived at dramatically different conclusions. InReference re s. 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada, the Supreme Court of British Columbia determined that while Mormon fundamentalist polygamists had religious freedom rights under Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to practice this aspect of their bona fide religious faith, the government of Canada was justified in limiting this right under Section 1 of the Charter. Prohibiting polygamy was necessary, the court found, in order to prevent the real and substantial risk of harm that it posed to women and children.1Conversely, in the United States, a trial-level court in Utah issued a summary judgment finding that a criminal prohibition against polygamous religious marriages violated the rights to freedom of religion under the First Amendment, and due process rights guaranteed by the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution. This judgment focused on the state's duty to tolerate minority religious practices, while downplaying the potential risks of polygamy to practitioners and their children.2

Abortion and the Right to Life in the International Bibliography

In this chapter, the authors examine abortion and the right to life in the international bibliography. The touchstone of our discussion is the landmark decision, Roe v Wade, which relied on the 14th Amendment. However, society's view on abortion is not clear, as it depends on many different factors and reasons. Abortion has been a controversial subject in many societies through history because of the moral, ethical, practical, and political power issues that surround it. However, abortions continue to be common in many areas where they are illegal. Today, they are more than mere words. “Soft” international law has also been found determinative in discerning the content of the 14th Amendment. However, the way a country deals with abortion is highly symbolic of women's status and how it treats women generally.