SUICIDE and a California law that permits the
possession of marijuana for medicinal use. In
addition, Ashcroft filed a brief with the Supreme
Court in support of ending the University of
Michigan’s affirmative action admission pro-
gram. While in office, Ashcroft advocated
protection for the rights of gun owners while
pressing for more severe punishments of those
who c ommited c apital cr imes using guns or
other
WEAPONS. Despite state moratoriums on
capital punishment, exonerations of death row
defendants in more than 100 cases, and Supreme
Court decisions that banned the execution of
mentally retarded inmates and overturned cases
where judges rather than juries had imposed the
death penalty, Ashcroft overruled U.S. attorneys
who had decided not to seek the death penalty,
and he approved death penalty prosecutions in
nearly half of all federal cases where capital
punishment might have been applicable.
Ashcroft resigned his position as attorney
general in November of 2004. He was succeeded
by
ALBERTO GONZALES. On May 18, 2009, a lawsuit
by Pakistani Muslim Javaid Iqbal against
Ashcroft and FBI Director
ROBERT S. MUELLER
III charging abuse after the September 11th
terrorist attacks was dismissed by the U.S.
Supreme Court due to a lack of evidence. Four

297 U.S. 288, 56 S. Ct. 466, 80 L. Ed. 2d 688
(1936), Justice
LOUIS BRANDEIS articulated a series
of seven principles that apply to the Supreme
Court’s policy of deciding constitutional ques-
tions. These principles include the policy that
the court: (1) should not decide a constitutional
question in a
FRIENDLY SUIT; (2) should not
anticipate a question of
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW;
(3) should not create a rule of constitutional
law that is broader than that called for by the
facts of the case; (4) should not decide a cons-
titutional issue if the case can be decided on
another ground; (5) should not rule on the
constitutionality of a statute unless the
PLAINTIFF
is harmed by the statute; (6) should not pass on
the constitutionality if the plaintiff has accepted
the benefits of the statute; and (7) should
not rule on the constitutionality of an act of
Congress without first analyzing whether the act
can be fairly construed in a way that would
avoid the constitutional question.
FURTHER READINGS
Farber, Daniel A. and Suzanna Sherry. 2009. Judgment Calls:
Principle and Politics in Constitutional Law. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Marks, Thomas C., Jr. 2008. “The Decline of American

Assassination may be used as a political weapon
by a state as well as by an individual; it may be
directed at the establishment or used by it.
The term assassination is generally applied
only to political murders—in the United States,
most commonly to attempts on the life of the
president. However, the classification of any one
incident as an assassination may be in part a
matter of perception. The assassination of the
outlaw Jesse James, in 1882, provides an ex-
ample of the difficulties. Thomas T. Crittenden,
governor of Missouri, assumed that being seen
as responsible for the death of the notorious
outlaw would be good for his political career. For
this reason, Crittenden granted each of the killers
a pardon in addition to a $10,000 reward. But the
U.S. public spoke vehemently against James’s
killers, dubbing them assassins and his death an
assassination. Crittenden was vilified by Amer-
icans, and his political career was destroyed.
It is not always easy to guess the motivations
of those who attempt assassinations or to
understand the historical and legal implications
of their actions. The anti-constitutional nature
of assassination has also made it a focal point
for conspiracies and conspiracy theories. The
first attempt at the assassination of a U.S.
president was Richard Lawrence’s attack on
ANDREW JACKSON in 1835. Although a jury
acquitted Lawrence on the ground of insanity,

RD E DITION
ASSASSINATION 389
Even greater controversy was caused when
the public was deprived of the opportunity to
see Lee Harvey Oswald tried for the assassina-
tion, in 1963, of President
JOHN F. KENNEDY.
Oswald’s death at the hands of
JACK RUBY
sparked theories of conspiracy that ranged from
Communist plots to Mafia hits to cover-ups by
U.S. officials. President
LYNDON B. JOHNSON
appointed a group of national figures, led by
Supreme Court Chief Justice
EARL WARREN,to
investigate the assassination and issue a report.
The
WARREN COMMISSION concluded that Oswald
had acted alone.
Despite this conclusion, conspiracy theories
remained widespread in books and in films such
as Oliver Stone’s JFK: The Untold Story (released
in 1991). In an attempt to calm public
suspicions surrounding the Kennedy assassina-
tion, the President John F. Kennedy Assassina-
tion Records Collection Act of 1992 (44 U.S.C.A.
§ 2107) was passed by Congress. The act released
much of the Kennedy assassination material in
government files. As of 2009, its effectiveness at

WITNESSES
prevented the committee from conclusively
demonstrating that presidents Eisenhower,
Kennedy, or Nixon personally authorized the
assassination of any foreign leader. However,
the evidence did show that between 1960 and
1970, the CIA was involved in several assassina-
tion plots.
The committee reported its findings in 1975
to a dismayed Congress. Public outcry was loud
and immediate. At the urging of both the House
of Representatives and the Senate, President
GERALD R. FORD signed an EXECUTIVE ORDER
banning all federal emplo yees from committing
assassination as a tool of U.S foreign policy or
for any other reason (Exec. Order No. 11905).
The order was extended by President
RONALD
REAGAN
(who survived an assassination attempt)
15 years later to also preclude hired assassins.
Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 2381 and 2385 (1976)
prohibits the assassination of any officer of
state or federal government.
Following the September 11, 2001, terrorist
attacks in New York City and Washington, D.C.,
Congress and the White House revisited the
propriety of political assassinations committed
by members of the U.S. government. In
December 2002, according to a Globe and Mail

the country where the terrorist was located were
either unable or unwilling to prevent the
terrorist from proceeding. But international
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
390 ASSASSINATION
law experts rebutted Anderson’s justification
with their own concerns. They cited the
potential for violating the
SOVEREIGNTY of
the country where the terrorist was killed, the
differing legal status between the CIA and the
uniformed military, and whether such a killing
would fall under the purview of the law of war.
FURTHER READINGS
Allen Chair Symposium 2002. 2003. “Political Assassination
as an Instrument of National Policy: An Inquiry into
Operations, Expediency, Morality, and Law.” Univ. of
Richmond Law Review (March).
“C.I.A. Had Secret Al Qaeda Plan.” 2009. Wall Street Journal,
July 13.
Donoghue, Mary Agnes. 1975. Assassination: Murder in
Politics. Chatsworth, Calif.: Major Books.
Edwards, William C., and Edward Steers. 2009. The Lincoln
Assassination: The Evidence. Champaign, Ill.: Univ. of
Illinois Press.
Harder, Tyler J. 2002. “Time to Repeal the Assassination
Ban of Executive Order 12,333: A Small Step in
Clarifying Current Law.” Military Law Review 172
(June).
Mazetti, Mark, and Scott Shane. 2009. “C.I.A. Had Plan to

consist of an act intended to cause an
apprehension of harmful or offensive contact
that causes apprehension of such contact in the
victim.
The act required for an assault must be
overt. Although words alone are insufficient,
they might create an assault when coupled with
some action that indicates the ability to carry
out the threat. A mere threat to harm is not an
assault; however, a threat combined with a
raised fist might be sufficient if it causes a
reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim.
Intent is an essential element of assault. In
tort law, it can be specific intent—if the
assailant intends to cause the apprehension of
harmful or offensive contact in the victim—or
general intent—if he or she intends to do the act
that causes such apprehension. In addition, the
intent element is satisfied if it is substantially
certain, to a
REASONABLE PERSON, that the act will
cause the result. A
DEFENDANT who holds a gun
to a victim’s head possesses the requisite intent,
because it is substantially certain that this act
will produce an apprehension in the victim. In
all cases, intent to kill or harm is irrelevant.
In criminal law, the attempted battery type
of assault requires a
SPECIFIC INTENT to commit

ASSAULT 391
aggravated if there is an intent to cause serious
harm. Po inting an unloaded gun at a victim to
frighten the individual is not considered an
aggravated assault.
Punishment
A defendant adjudged to have committed civil
assault is liable for damages. The question of the
amount that should be awarded to the victim is
determined by a jury.
COMPENSATORY DAMAGES,
which are aimed at compensating the victim for
the injury, are common.
NOMINAL DAMAGES,a
small sum awarded for the invasion of a right
even though there has been no substantial
injury, may be awarded. In some cases, courts
allow
PUNITIVE DAMAGES, which are designed to
punish the defendant for the wrongful conduct.
The punishment for criminal assault is a
fine, imprisonment, or both. Penalties are more
severe when the assault is aggravated. Many
states have statutes dividing criminal assault
into various degrees. As in aggravated assault,
the severity of the crime, the extent of violence
and harm, and the criminal intent of the
defendant are all factors considered in deter-
mining the sentence imposed.
FURTHER READINGS

CRIMINAL LAW,
an assault may additionally be defined as any
attempt to commit a battery.
At
COMMON LAW, both offenses were mis-
demeanors. As of the early 2000s, under virtually
all criminal codes, they are either misdemeanors
or felonies. They are characterized as
FELONIOUS
when accompanied by a criminal intent, such as
an intent to kill, rob, or
RAPE, or when they are
committed with a dangerous weapon.
Intent
Intent is an essentia l ele ment of both of fenses.
Generally, it is only necessary for the
DEFENDANT to
have an intent to do the act tha t c auses the harm.
In other words, the act must be done voluntarily.
Although an inte nt to harm the vict im is li kely t o
exist, it is not a required element of e ither offense.
There is an exception to this rule for the
attempted battery type of criminal assa ult. If a
defendant who commi t s this crime does not ha ve
an intent to ha rm the victim, the individual
cannot be guilty of t he offense.
Defenses Consent
In almost all states, consent is a defense to civil
assault and battery. Some jurisdictions hold that
Victimization Rates for Assaults by Crime and Characteristic, 2006

to constitute a defense. If it is obtained by
FRAUD
or duress or is otherwise unlawful, it will not
suffice. When an act exceeds the scope of the
given consent, the defense is not available. A
person who participates in a football game
implies consent to a certain amount of physical
contact; however, the individual is not deemed
to consent to contact beyond what is commonly
permitted in the sport.
Self-Defense Generally, a person may use
whatever degree of force is reasonably necessary
for protection from bodily harm. Whether this
defense is valid is usually determined by a jury.
A person who initiates a fight cannot claim
SELF-
DEFENSE unless the opponent responded with a
greater and unforeseeable degree of force. When
an aggressor retreats and is later attacked by the
same opponent, the defense may be asserted.
The use of
DEADLY FORCE in response may be
justified if it is initially used by the aggressor.
The situation must be such that a
REASONABLE
PERSON
would be likely to fear for his or her life.
In some states, a person must retreat prior to
using deadly force if the individual can do so in
complete safety. A majority of states, however,

property or a person who rightfully possesses it,
such as a tenant, may use force against a
trespasser. Generally, a request to leave the
property must be made before the application
of force, unless the request would be futile. The
amount of force used must be reasonable, and,
unless it is necessary for self-defense, the
infliction of bodily harm upon an intruder is
improper. Courts have traditionally been more
liberal in allowing the use of force to protect
one’s dwelling. Subsequent cases, however,
indicated that there must be a threat to the
personal safety of the occupants.
The states are divided on the question of
whether a person who is legally entitled to
property may use force to recover possession of
it. In most jurisdictions, a landowner is not
liable for assault and battery if the owner
forcibly expels someone who is wrongfully on
the property. The owner must not, however, use
excessive force, and the fact that the person may
not be held civilly liable does not relieve the
owner of criminal liability. In some states, the
use of force against a person wrongfully in
possession of land is not permitted unless such
person has tortiously dispossessed the actor or
the actor’s predecessor in title.
If possession of real or
PERSONAL PROPERTY is
in dispute, the universal rule is that force cannot

removal of disruptive persons who interfere
with their duties.
Persons with authority in certain relation-
ships, such as parents or teachers, may use force
as a disciplinary measure, provided they do not
exceed the scope of their authority. Punishment
may not be cruel or excessive.
Punishment
The law considers an assault and battery to be
an invasion of the personal security of the
victim for which the wrongdoer is required to
pay for damages. The determination of the
amount of damages to which a victim might be
entitled if a defendant is found civilly liable is
usually made by a jury. Generally, a
PLAINTIFF is
entitled to
COMPENSATORY DAMAGES that compen-
sate for injuries that are both directly and
indirectly related to the wrong. Examples of
compensatory damages include damages for
pain and suffering, damages for medical
expenses, and damages for lost earnings result-
ing from the victim’s inability to work.
NOMINAL
DAMAGES
, given although there is no harm at all,
or merely a slight one, may also be awarded in
an assault and battery action. Some jurisdictions
allow the award of

28, 2009).
CROSS REFERENCE
Hot Pursuit; Nominal Damages; Personal Property; Puni-
tive Damages; Real Property.
ASSEMBLY
The congregation of a number of persons at the
same locat ion.
Popularly-elected political assemblies are
those mandated by the Constitution and laws,
such as the general assembly. The lower, or
more populous, arm of the legislature in several
states is also known as the House of Assembly or
the Assembl y.
Under the
FIRST AMENDMENT to the United
States Constitution, “Congress shall make no
law abridging the right of the people
peaceably to assemble.” When a governmental
unit sets aside property for the public use, the
property is designed as a “public forum” for
First Amendment purposes, and the govern-
mental unit must properly allow the exercise by
the public of constitutional rights, including
freedom of assembly. Examples of public
forums include sidewalks, parks, and libraries.
The right to assemble includes the right to
PROTEST, although rights of assembly are gener-
ally balanced with the need for public order.
The Supreme Court has held that local govern-
ments may constitutionally require those par-

To tax by having qualified experts estimate the
value of property by considering the nature of the
property, its size, the value of other comparable
property, and the proportionate share of services
that is used by that property. To levy a charge on
the owner of property that has been improved at
the expense of the local government unit, such as
when sewers or sidewalks are installed.
ASSESSED VALUATION
The financial worth assigned to property by taxing
authorities that is used as a basis or factor against
which the tax rate is applied.
A prescribed amount of the value of each
unit must be paid as taxes in the future. In most
cases, the assessed value is not representative of
the
FAIR MARKET VALUE of the property.
ASSESSMENT
The process by which the financial worth of
property is determined. The amount at which an
item is valued. A demand by the board of directors
of a corporation for the payment of any money that
is still owed on the purchase of capital stock. The
determination of the amount of damages to be
awarded to a plaintiff who has been successful in a
lawsuit. The ascertainment of the pro rata share of
taxes to be paid by members of a group of taxpayers
who have directly benefited from a particular
common goal or project according to the benefit
conferred upon the individual or his or her

property, commercial property, copyrights,
and short-term government obligations. When
a capital asset is sold, any gain received is given
preferential tax treatment.
A current, liquid, or quick asset is an item
that can be readily converted to cash, such as
stocks and bonds.
A fixed asset is one of a permanent or long-
term nature used in the operation of a business
and not intended for sale.
A frozen asset is one that cannot be easily
converted into cash, such as
REAL ESTATE when
there is no market, or that cannot be used
because of a legal restriction, such as a
SPENDTHRIFT TRUST.
An intangible asset is one to which an
arbitrary dollar value is attached because it has
no intrinsic
MARKET VALUE but represents finan-
cial value, such as the
GOOD WILL of a business,
TRADEMARKS,orPATENTS.
ASSIGN
To transfer to another, as to assign one’s right to
receive rental income from property to another. To
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
ASSIGN 395
designate for a particular function, as to assign an
attorney to defend an indigent in a criminal

individuals.
ASSIGNMENT
A transfer of rights in real property or personal
property to another that gives the recipient—the
transferee—the rights that the owner or holder of
the property—the transferor—had prior to the
transfer.
An assignment of wages is the transfer of the
right to collect wages from the wage earner to
his or her creditor. Statutes regulate the extent
to which an assignment may be made.
ASSIGNMENT FOR BENEFIT
OF CREDITORS
The voluntary transfer of all or most of a debtor’s
property to another person in trust so that he or
she will collect any money that is owed to the
debtor, sell the debtor’s property, and apply the
money received to the payment of the debts,
returning any surplus to the debtor.
The debtor is the assignor, the transferor;
and the person who takes
LEGAL TITLE to the
property is the assignee.
Types
There are three types of assignments that are
categorized according to the limitations im-
posed upon the arrangement. A general assign-
ment is one involving the transfer of all the
debtor’s property for the benefit of all his or her
creditors. A partial assignment is one in which

it cannot be done to dishonestly deprive a
debtor’s creditors of their rights to have
property sold to repay debts. When an assign-
ment for the benefit of creditors is intend ed
by the debtor to place his or her property
beyond the legal reach of creditors, it is called a
FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE. This type of assignment
is void, or legally ineffective, under statutes that
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
396 ASSIGNED ACCOUNT
prohibit such arrangements. An assignment by
which the assignor-debtor retains any interest,
benefit, oradvantage from the conveyance, such as
keeping the right to revoke the assignment, made
to
DEFRAUD creditors is also a fraudulent convey-
ance, as is an assignment by which the assignee is
required to delay liquidation of the assets.
In some jurisdictions, a partial assignment is
considered a fraudulent conveyance because the
creditors are hindered and delayed in receiving
payment if they must seek payment from the
debtor after first being referred to the assignee.
Other jurisdictions treat any assignment by a
solvent debtor as fraudulent on the theory that
such an arrangement prevents the immediate
sale of the property so that creditors are delayed
and hindered.
Deficiency
A debtor is still liable to pay his or her creditors if

This agreement is made between _________________________________________________________ [name of assignor] ("Assignor"),
residing at ________________________________________________________________________________________ [address], and
_______________________________________________________________________________[name of assignee(s)] ("Assignee(s)"),
residing at ________________________________________________________________________________________[address].
The Assignor is unable to pay in full and desires to assign all of [his/her] property to Assignee for the purpose of the payment of this debt.
Therefore, the Assignor hereby assigns, conveys, grants, and transfers to Assignee all of Assignor's property and interests in property,
whether real or personal, tangible or intangible (except property exempt by law from levy and sale under execution) wherever situated, in
trust for the benefit of the Assignee.
[Include description of the property and assets conveyed to the Assignee]
DATED on __________________________ __________________________, 20______ at:
_______________________________________________________
Assignor
ACCEPTED BY:
_______________________________________________________
Assi
g
nee
A sample assignment
for the benefit of
creditors
ILLUSTRATION BY GGS
CREATIVE RESOURCES.
REPRODUCED BY
PERMISSION OF GALE,
A PART OF CENGAGE
LEARNING.
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3
RD E DITION
ASSIGNMENT FOR BENEFIT OF CREDITORS 397