Export your learner materials as an interactive game, a webpage, or FAQ style cheatsheet.
Unsaved Work Found!
It looks like you have unsaved work from a previous session. Would you like to restore it?
Total Categories: 6
Section 51(xxvi) of the Constitution of Australia, commonly known as 'the race power,' grants the Commonwealth Parliament the authority to create specific laws concerning people of any race.
Answer: True
The source confirms that Section 51(xxvi) is known as 'the race power' and grants the Commonwealth the authority to make special laws for people of any race.
The original wording of Section 51(xxvi) explicitly included Aboriginal people in any state under the Commonwealth's race power, ensuring federal oversight from the outset.
Answer: False
The original wording of Section 51(xxvi) explicitly excluded 'the aboriginal race in any State' from the Commonwealth's race power, meaning federal oversight for Aboriginal people was not ensured from the outset.
Edmund Barton argued at the 1898 Constitutional Convention that Section 51(xxvi) was unnecessary and should be removed to promote racial equality.
Answer: False
Edmund Barton argued the opposite, stating that Section 51(xxvi) was necessary to 'regulate the affairs of the people of coloured or inferior races,' reflecting discriminatory views rather than a desire for racial equality.
Quick and Garran's 1901 interpretation of Section 51(xxvi) included the power to localize alien races within defined areas and restrict their migration.
Answer: True
Quick and Garran's 1901 commentary indeed stated that Section 51(xxvi) enabled Parliament to localize alien races, restrict their migration, and confine them to certain occupations.
All delegates at the 1898 Constitutional Convention supported the use of legislative power to deal specifically with alien races once they were admitted to Australia.
Answer: False
Some delegates, including Charles Kingston, John Quick, and Josiah Symon, argued against using legislative power to deal specifically with alien races once they were admitted, contending they should be treated the same as other citizens.
The general scope of Section 51(xxvi) is considered unfettered, granting plenary powers to the Commonwealth Parliament, subject only to other provisions of the Constitution.
Answer: True
The source confirms that Section 51(xxvi) grants unfettered, plenary powers to the Commonwealth Parliament, meaning these powers are full and complete, limited only by other constitutional provisions.
Section 51 of the Constitution of Australia outlines the enumerated legislative powers of the Federal Parliament.
Answer: True
Section 51 of the Constitution of Australia indeed enumerates the legislative powers of the Federal Parliament, with subsection (xxvi) being one such power.
Charles Kingston was a delegate at the 1898 Constitutional Convention who strongly supported race-based legislation once people were admitted to Australia.
Answer: False
Charles Kingston, a delegate at the 1898 Constitutional Convention, argued against race-based legislation for admitted alien races, contending they should be treated equally once admitted.
The term 'plenary powers' in relation to Section 51(xxvi) signifies that the legislative authority is full, complete, and unrestricted, except by other explicit provisions within the Constitution.
Answer: True
The term 'plenary powers' accurately describes the full, complete, and unrestricted legislative authority granted by Section 51(xxvi), subject only to other constitutional provisions.
The Constitution of Australia is the constitutional document that contains Section 51(xxvi).
Answer: True
Section 51(xxvi) is indeed contained within the Constitution of Australia, which is the supreme law of the nation.
The Parliament of Australia is the legislative body empowered by Section 51(xxvi) to make special laws for people of any race.
Answer: True
The Parliament of Australia, as the legislative body of the Commonwealth, is indeed empowered by Section 51(xxvi) to make special laws for people of any race.
What is Section 51(xxvi) of the Constitution of Australia commonly known as?
Answer: The Race Power
Section 51(xxvi) of the Constitution of Australia is commonly known as 'the race power'.
How was Section 51(xxvi) originally worded regarding Aboriginal people in any State?
Answer: It explicitly excluded Aboriginal people in any State from the Commonwealth's race power.
The original wording of Section 51(xxvi) explicitly excluded 'the aboriginal race in any State' from the Commonwealth's power to make special laws.
According to Edmund Barton at the 1898 Constitutional Convention, why was Section 51(xxvi) necessary?
Answer: To regulate the affairs of people of coloured or inferior races.
Edmund Barton argued that Section 51(xxvi) was necessary to 'regulate the affairs of the people of coloured or inferior races who are in the Commonwealth,' reflecting the discriminatory views prevalent at the time.
Which specific groups were initially targeted for restrictive laws under Section 51(xxvi) as mentioned in the source?
Answer: Chinese and Kanakas.
The source states that Section 51(xxvi) was initially intended to enable laws restricting migrant laborers, specifically mentioning the Chinese and Kanakas.
In 1901, Quick and Garran interpreted Section 51(xxvi) to enable Parliament to do which of the following for alien races?
Answer: Localize them within defined areas, restrict their migration, and confine them to certain occupations.
Quick and Garran's 1901 interpretation of Section 51(xxvi) included the power to localize alien races, restrict their migration, and confine them to certain occupations.
What was the stance of some delegates like Charles Kingston at the 1898 Constitutional Convention regarding race-based legislation for admitted alien races?
Answer: They contended that once admitted, alien races should be treated the same as other citizens.
Delegates such as Charles Kingston, John Quick, and Josiah Symon argued that once alien races were admitted to Australia, they should be treated the same as other citizens, opposing specific race-based legislation for them.
What does the term 'plenary powers' signify in relation to the general scope of Section 51(xxvi)?
Answer: That the legislative authority is full, complete, and unrestricted, subject only to other constitutional provisions.
The term 'plenary powers' signifies that the legislative authority granted by Section 51(xxvi) is full, complete, and unrestricted, except where explicitly limited by other provisions of the Constitution.
Who were John Quick and Josiah Symon, and what was their position on race-based legislation at the 1898 Constitutional Convention?
Answer: They argued against using legislative power to deal specifically with alien races once admitted.
John Quick and Josiah Symon were delegates at the 1898 Constitutional Convention who argued that once alien races were admitted to Australia, they should be treated the same as other citizens, opposing specific race-based legislation.
The 1967 referendum saw the Australian people vote to delete the words 'other than the aboriginal race in any State' from Section 51(xxvi).
Answer: True
The 1967 referendum indeed resulted in the deletion of the phrase 'other than the aboriginal race in any State' from Section 51(xxvi), centralizing the power to legislate for Aboriginal people with the Commonwealth.
The 1967 referendum amendment was initially perceived as a negative change for Aboriginal peoples' welfare due to concerns about federal overreach.
Answer: False
The 1967 amendment was largely perceived as a positive change, as the Commonwealth was seen as more progressive towards Aboriginal welfare than the states, aiming for more consistent federal oversight.
Prior to the 1967 referendum, states were generally seen as more positive towards Aboriginal peoples' welfare than the Commonwealth.
Answer: False
Prior to the 1967 referendum, the Commonwealth was generally seen as being more positive towards Aboriginal peoples' welfare than the states collectively, leading to the desire for federal power in this area.
What significant change occurred to Section 51(xxvi) as a result of the 1967 referendum?
Answer: It deleted the words 'other than the aboriginal race in any State'.
The 1967 referendum led to the deletion of the phrase 'other than the aboriginal race in any State' from Section 51(xxvi), thereby extending the Commonwealth's race power to Aboriginal people.
What was the perceived positive impact of the 1967 referendum amendment on Aboriginal peoples' welfare at the time?
Answer: It was seen as centralizing power to a Commonwealth government perceived as more positive towards them than the states.
The 1967 amendment was perceived positively as it centralized power to the Commonwealth, which was generally seen as more favorable towards Aboriginal peoples' welfare than the individual states.
What was the general sentiment towards the Commonwealth's role in Aboriginal welfare prior to the 1967 referendum?
Answer: The Commonwealth was generally seen as being more positive towards Aboriginal peoples' welfare than the states collectively.
Prior to the 1967 referendum, the Commonwealth was generally perceived as more positive towards Aboriginal peoples' welfare than the states, influencing the desire for federal intervention.
Section 51(xxvi) mandates requirements for legal equality in all legislation enacted under its power, ensuring non-discrimination.
Answer: False
Section 51(xxvi) does not mandate legal equality; rather, it supports the rejection of legal equality requirements in legislation, as evidenced by High Court interpretations like Kruger v Commonwealth.
The central issue in the 1998 High Court case Kartinyeri v Commonwealth was whether Section 51(xxvi) could be used to enact legislation that adversely discriminated on the basis of race.
Answer: True
The central issue in Kartinyeri v Commonwealth was indeed whether Section 51(xxvi) permitted the enactment of legislation that adversely discriminated on racial grounds, with the High Court justices divided on this matter.
Justices Gummow and Hayne in Kartinyeri v Commonwealth held that the use of race as a basis for parliamentary power was inherently beneficial and non-discriminatory.
Answer: False
Justices Gummow and Hayne held the opposite view, stating that the use of race as the basis of parliamentary power was inherently discriminatory, and that benefits to one race might be detrimental to another.
Justice Kirby's view in Kartinyeri v Commonwealth was that Section 51(xxvi) did not permit the enactment of laws to the detriment of the people of any race.
Answer: True
Justice Kirby's dissenting opinion in Kartinyeri v Commonwealth was that Section 51(xxvi) should not be interpreted to permit laws detrimental to any race.
The 1997 High Court case Kruger v Commonwealth supported the idea that Section 51(xxvi) allows for the rejection of legal equality requirements in validly enacted legislation.
Answer: True
The 1997 High Court case Kruger v Commonwealth is cited as supporting the principle that Section 51(xxvi) permits the rejection of legal equality requirements in validly enacted legislation.
Does Section 51(xxvi) support requirements for legal equality in legislation?
Answer: No, it supports the rejection of legal equality requirements.
Section 51(xxvi) does not support legal equality requirements; rather, it allows for legislation that differentiates based on race, as confirmed by High Court interpretations.
What was the central issue in the 1998 High Court case Kartinyeri v Commonwealth concerning Section 51(xxvi)?
Answer: Whether Section 51(xxvi) could be used to enact legislation that adversely discriminated on the basis of race.
The central issue in Kartinyeri v Commonwealth was whether Section 51(xxvi) could be used to enact legislation that adversely discriminated on racial grounds.
How did Justices Gummow and Hayne interpret the race power in Kartinyeri v Commonwealth?
Answer: They stated that the use of race as the basis of parliamentary power was inherently discriminatory.
Justices Gummow and Hayne interpreted the race power as inherently discriminatory, noting that benefits to one race could be detrimental to another.
What was Justice Kirby's view on the race power in Kartinyeri v Commonwealth?
Answer: He held that Section 51(xxvi) did not permit the enactment of laws to the detriment of the people of any race.
Justice Kirby's view was that Section 51(xxvi) should not be interpreted to allow for laws detrimental to any race.
Legislation empowered by other constitutional powers, such as Section 122 (which pertains to territories), may also be racially discriminatory.
Answer: True
The source explicitly states that legislation under other constitutional powers, such as Section 122 for territories, can be racially discriminatory, citing the Northern Territory National Emergency Response as an example.
The Northern Territory National Emergency Response required the use of Section 51(xxvi) because it was implemented across multiple states.
Answer: False
The Northern Territory National Emergency Response did not require Section 51(xxvi) because it was implemented only in a territory, relying instead on Section 122 of the Constitution.
The Stronger Futures policy was a continuation of the Northern Territory National Emergency Response.
Answer: True
The Stronger Futures policy is explicitly identified as a continuation of the Northern Territory National Emergency Response, both relying on Section 122 for their implementation in the territory.
Which constitutional power was used for the Northern Territory National Emergency Response, allowing for potentially racially discriminatory legislation in a territory?
Answer: Section 122.
The Northern Territory National Emergency Response utilized Section 122 of the Constitution, which grants the Commonwealth power to legislate for territories, enabling potentially racially discriminatory laws in that context.
What was the Stronger Futures policy?
Answer: A continuation of the Northern Territory National Emergency Response.
The Stronger Futures policy was a continuation of the Northern Territory National Emergency Response, both implemented under Section 122 of the Constitution.
The 2012 Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians recommended a referendum to repeal Section 51(xxvi).
Answer: True
The 2012 Expert Panel indeed recommended a referendum to repeal Section 51(xxvi) and replace it with new provisions for Indigenous Australians.
The proposed new Section 51A, as recommended by the Expert Panel in 2012, would aim to prohibit racially discriminatory legislation.
Answer: False
The proposed new Section 51A would empower the Commonwealth to make laws for Indigenous Australians and formally recognize them. The prohibition of racially discriminatory legislation would be addressed by the proposed new Section 116A.
The 2017 Referendum Council's recommendations largely echoed those made by the 2012 Expert Panel regarding constitutional recognition for Indigenous Australians.
Answer: True
The 2017 Referendum Council's recommendations for constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australians largely aligned with the proposals put forth by the 2012 Expert Panel.
The 2017 Referendum Council formally included the repeal of Section 25 of the Constitution in its recommendations.
Answer: False
The 2017 Referendum Council's recommendations did not formally include the repeal of Section 25, which was a point of difference from the 2012 Expert Panel and 2015 Joint Select Committee.
The Uluru Statement from the Heart primarily called for the immediate repeal of Section 51(xxvi) without proposing any replacement sections.
Answer: False
The Uluru Statement from the Heart echoed the 2012 Expert Panel's recommendations, which included repealing Section 51(xxvi) and replacing it with new sections (51A and 116A) for Indigenous recognition and beneficial laws, as well as calling for a Voice to Parliament.
The 2012 Expert Panel and the 2015 Joint Select Committee both recommended the formal repeal of Section 25 of the Constitution.
Answer: True
Both the 2012 Expert Panel and the 2015 Joint Select Committee on Constitutional Recognition recommended the formal repeal of Section 25 of the Constitution.
The primary goal of the proposed new sections s 51A and s 116A is to replace the existing race power with provisions for beneficial laws for Indigenous Australians, recognition, and prohibition of discriminatory legislation.
Answer: True
The proposed new sections 51A and 116A aim to replace the existing race power with a framework for beneficial laws, formal recognition of Indigenous Australians, and a prohibition against discriminatory legislation.
What did the Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians recommend in 2012 regarding Section 51(xxvi)?
Answer: To hold a referendum to repeal Section 51(xxvi) and replace it with new sections.
The 2012 Expert Panel recommended a referendum to repeal Section 51(xxvi) and replace it with new sections (51A and 116A) to address Indigenous recognition and legislative powers.
What would the proposed new Section 51A, as recommended by the Expert Panel in 2012, empower the Commonwealth to do?
Answer: Make laws for Indigenous Australians and formally recognize them as Australia's first peoples.
The proposed new Section 51A would empower the Commonwealth to make laws for Indigenous Australians and formally recognize them as Australia's first peoples.
What was a key difference between the 2012 Expert Panel's recommendations and the 2017 Referendum Council's recommendations?
Answer: The 2017 Council did not formally include the repeal of Section 25, which the 2012 Panel had.
A key difference was that the 2017 Referendum Council did not formally include the repeal of Section 25, unlike the 2012 Expert Panel and 2015 Joint Select Committee.
What is the Uluru Statement from the Heart primarily known for in the context of constitutional recognition?
Answer: Its recommendations regarding constitutional recognition for Indigenous Australians, echoing the 2012 Expert Panel.
The Uluru Statement from the Heart is primarily known for its recommendations on constitutional recognition for Indigenous Australians, which largely echoed those of the 2012 Expert Panel, including a call for a Voice to Parliament.
The Commonwealth Law Reports (CLR) is a publication focused on international legal judgments.
Answer: False
The Commonwealth Law Reports (CLR) is the authorized series of law reports for decisions of the High Court of Australia, not a publication focused on international legal judgments.
Robert French authored a chapter titled 'The Race Power: A Constitutional Chimera' in 2003.
Answer: True
Robert French indeed authored the chapter 'The Race Power: A Constitutional Chimera' in the 2003 book 'Australian Constitutional Landmarks'.
George Williams argued in 2023 that racial divisions were a recent development in the Australian Constitution.
Answer: False
George Williams argued in 2023 that 'Racial divide has always been part of our Constitution,' indicating that racial divisions are not a recent development.
The Department of Families, Housing, Community Services & Indigenous Affairs commissioned the 'Recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples in the Constitution: Report of the Expert Panel' in January 2012.
Answer: True
The Department of Families, Housing, Community Services & Indigenous Affairs commissioned and published the 2012 Expert Panel report on constitutional recognition for Indigenous Australians.
ANTaR is a government department responsible for constitutional reform in Australia.
Answer: False
ANTaR is an Australian advocacy organization working for the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, not a government department responsible for constitutional reform.
The High Court of Australia's primary role is to draft new constitutional amendments.
Answer: False
The High Court of Australia's primary role is to interpret the Constitution and serve as the final court of appeal, not to draft new constitutional amendments.
The 1901 publication 'The Annotated Constitution of the Australian Commonwealth' by Quick and Garran provides foundational legal commentary on the Australian Constitution shortly after federation.
Answer: True
Quick and Garran's 1901 publication is a foundational legal text providing detailed commentary and interpretation of the Australian Constitution shortly after its federation.
The citation Constitution (Cth) s 122 refers to the section granting the Commonwealth power over external affairs.
Answer: False
The citation Constitution (Cth) s 122 refers to Section 122, which grants the Commonwealth Parliament power to make laws for the government of any territory, not external affairs.
The Joint Select Committee on Constitutional Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples is primarily responsible for implementing constitutional changes.
Answer: False
The Joint Select Committee's role was to examine and report on proposals for constitutional recognition, not primarily to implement constitutional changes.
What is the Commonwealth Law Reports (CLR)?
Answer: The authorized series of law reports for decisions of the High Court of Australia.
The Commonwealth Law Reports (CLR) is the authorized series of law reports for decisions of the High Court of Australia, documenting significant legal judgments.
Which publication featured George Williams' article 'Removing racism from Australia's constitutional DNA' in 2012?
Answer: The Alternative Law Journal.
George Williams' article 'Removing racism from Australia's constitutional DNA' was published in the Alternative Law Journal in 2012.
Which government department commissioned the 'Recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples in the Constitution: Report of the Expert Panel' in January 2012?
Answer: Department of Families, Housing, Community Services & Indigenous Affairs.
The Department of Families, Housing, Community Services & Indigenous Affairs commissioned the 2012 Expert Panel report on constitutional recognition for Indigenous Australians.
What is ANTaR?
Answer: An Australian advocacy organization working for the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
ANTaR is an Australian advocacy organization dedicated to working for the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
What is the primary role of the High Court of Australia regarding the Constitution?
Answer: To interpret the Constitution and serve as the final court of appeal.
The High Court of Australia's primary role is to interpret the Constitution and function as the final court of appeal within the Australian judicial system.
What is the significance of the 1901 publication 'The Annotated Constitution of the Australian Commonwealth' by Quick and Garran?
Answer: It provided detailed commentary and interpretation of the Constitution shortly after federation.
Quick and Garran's 1901 publication is significant as a foundational legal text offering detailed commentary and interpretation of the Australian Constitution soon after its federation.