Congress accuses RSS of plotting to dismantle Constitution over Preamble remarks
The Congress party on Friday slammed the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) following its call to reconsider the inclusion of the words 'socialist' and 'secular' in the Preamble of the Indian Constitution.The party alleged that RSS has "never accepted" Babasaheb Ambedkar's Constitution and that their demand was part of the conspiracy to destroy it.
At an event marking the 50th anniversary of the Emergency, RSS General Secretary Dattatreya Hosabale said that the terms 'socialist' and 'secular' were not part of Ambedkar's original draft. He added they were inserted during the Emergency via the 1976 Forty‑Second Amendment, a period when Parliament, judiciary, and fundamental rights were all severely curtailed .
Hosabale said, 'The Preamble Baba Saheb Ambedkar made never had these words. During the Emergency, judiciary became lame then these words were added,' and called for a public debate on whether they should remain.
He also demanded that the Congress apologise for the authoritarian excesses and human rights violations committed during that period
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Gazette
20 minutes ago
- India Gazette
MP: Case filed against Cong chief Jitendra Patwari for allegedly bribing villager to allege being fed human excreta
Ashoknagar (Madhya Pradesh) [India], June 28 (ANI): Madhya Pradesh Police, on Saturday, filed a case against state Congress President Jitendra Patwari for bribing a villager to make false allegations about being fed human excreta, Superintendent of Police (SP) Vineet Kumar Jain said. According to police, Jitendra (Jitu) Patwari asked villager Gajraj Lodhi to make allegations against Mungaoli village Sarpanch. SP Vineet Kumar Jain told ANI, 'Yesterday, Gajraj Lodhi met the collector of Ashoknagar personally and handed him an affidavit stating that some Congress leaders took him to Orchha, where he met Jitu Patwari. Jitu Patwari told him to allege about being fed faeces (by Mungaoli village sarpanch) and bribed him for it.' He added that the police found the allegations to be false and registered a case against the Congress leader. 'Later, he said that the allegations about this were false, and he made this allegation on Jitu Patwari's demand... Based on this, a case has been filed against Jitu Patwari and his aids under various sections of BNS,' SP Kumar said. Earlier on Wednesday, Patwari shared an X post, where he made the above allegations and said that the accused were supporters of BJP leader Brijendra Yadav. Addressing to Prime Minister Narendra Modi he wrote, 'Prime Minister Ji, @BJP4MP The jungle rule of power is crossing the limits of anarchy! A youth from the Lodhi community had 'human excrement' stuffed in his mouth just because he asked for a 'ration slip'! It is alleged that since the accused are supporters of @BJP4India MLA Brijendra Yadav, that's why @DGP_MP and @CMMadhyaPradesh are not allowing any action to be taken?' Referring to a previous incident of a man urinating on a tribal youth, he questioned law and order in Madhya Pradesh. 'In this same Madhya Pradesh, a shameful incident of urinating on the head of a tribal youth has already taken place! Why does #BJP consider Dalits, backward classes, and tribals as its enemies in Madhya Pradesh? The law and order in Madhya Pradesh have completely collapsed, yet @DrMohanYadav51 remains the Home Minister with arrogance! Meanwhile, the people of Madhya Pradesh now want freedom from this jungle rule,' the X post further read. (ANI)
Time of India
29 minutes ago
- Time of India
Birthright citizenship case: US Supreme Court limits nationwide injunctions – what it means for immigrants
The US Supreme Court has curtailed the power of federal judges to issue nationwide injunctions, clearing the way for President Donald Trump's controversial order to end birthright citizenship to take effect in over half the country. The ruling does not address whether the order is constitutional but allows it to be enforced in 28 states that had not challenged it, while keeping it temporarily blocked in 22 Democratic-led states. Immigrant rights groups have warned the decision could result in stateless newborns and a chaotic patchwork of laws across the US. The 6–3 decision came in response to President Donald Trump's controversial executive order ending birthright citizenship for children born to undocumented or temporary visa holders on US soil. The ruling was immediately hailed by Trump as a 'monumental victory for the Constitution,' while immigrant rights groups and Democratic leaders voiced concern that it could lead to a patchwork of legal standards across the country and leave some newborns stateless. 'By denying lower courts the ability to enforce that right uniformly, the Court has invited chaos, inequality, and fear,' said Krish O'Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of Global Refuge. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Free P2,000 GCash eGift UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo Although the policy remains blocked in 22 Democratic-led states that sued to stop the order, the Supreme Court imposed a 30-day delay before it can take effect in the rest of the country. That window gives immigrant rights groups time to regroup and possibly file new challenges as class-action lawsuits. But with the door now open for selective enforcement, immigration advocates warn that confusion and legal uncertainty could have devastating consequences for vulnerable families. What Is Birthright Citizenship? Birthright citizenship is a constitutional right enshrined in the 14th Amendment, ratified after the Civil War to ensure citizenship for formerly enslaved people. It states, 'All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.' The principle was reinforced in the landmark 1898 Supreme Court case *United States v. Wong Kim Ark*, where the court ruled that a man born in the US to Chinese parents was a citizen, regardless of his parents' immigration status. Since then, birthright citizenship has been a cornerstone of US constitutional law. Exceptions have been extremely limited, such as children born to foreign diplomats. Trump's order seeks to broaden those exceptions dramatically. Trump's executive order and the legal backlash Signed in January, Trump's executive order attempts to end automatic citizenship for babies born to undocumented immigrants or temporary visa holders. He has described the policy as a 'magnet for illegal immigration,' arguing that the phrase 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' in the 14th Amendment justifies excluding these children from citizenship. Lower federal courts, however, repeatedly blocked the order from taking effect. 'This is a blatantly unconstitutional order,' said US District Judge John Coughenour in Seattle. In Maryland, Judge Deborah Boardman wrote that 'the Supreme Court has resoundingly rejected and no court in the country has ever endorsed' Trump's view of the 14th Amendment. Despite these rulings, the Supreme Court declined to weigh in on the constitutionality of the order itself, focusing instead on the scope of the injunctions issued by the lower courts. The Supreme Court's ruling: what it changes The court's conservative majority, led by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, ruled that federal district judges do not have the authority to block a presidential policy nationwide. 'Federal courts do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch,' Barrett wrote. The decision sends the current challenges back to the lower courts, instructing them to narrow their injunctions to only cover plaintiffs with standing in the 22 states that sued. In the remaining 28 states — including Arkansas, Mississippi, and Texas — Trump's order could go into effect after the 30-day delay. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing for the dissent, called the decision 'nothing less than an open invitation for the government to bypass the constitution.' What comes next for immigrants? Immigrant rights groups are already adjusting their legal strategies, preparing class-action lawsuits in states like Maryland and New Hampshire. However, legal experts warn that such efforts face numerous procedural hurdles. 'It's not the case that a class action is a sort of easy, breezy way of getting around this problem,' said Suzette Malveaux, a law professor at Washington and Lee University. The immediate concern is for babies born during the transition period. In the 28 states where the order may soon apply, children born to undocumented or temporary residents may be denied citizenship, risking statelessness and potential deportation. Sotomayor urged the lower courts to 'act swiftly' in adjudicating new challenges to the executive order, while Trump indicated he would move quickly on a broader slate of policies that had previously been blocked by nationwide injunctions. 'This morning, the Supreme Court has delivered a monumental victory for the Constitution, the separation of powers and the rule of law,' Trump declared at the White House, flanked by Attorney General Pam Bondi. 'We can now promptly proceed with numerous policies, including birthright citizenship.'
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
BJP, BRS slam Telangana government over renaming of Annapurna Canteen Scheme
The Congress government's decision to rename Annapurna Canteens as Indiramma Canteens has sparked controversy in Telangana. The BJP demanded that the CM Revanth Reddy-led Telangana government roll back the decision.(PTI) The Annapurna Canteen scheme, launched by the previous Bharatiya Rashtra Samithi (BRS) government, provided hot, hygienic, and nutritious meals for just ₹ 5 to the poor, daily wage workers, and labourers in urban regions of Telangana. Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) National spokesperson NV Subhash criticised the move, calling it a "publicity stunt" aimed at impressing the Gandhi family. He demanded that the state government roll back the decision and suggested it was a "return gift" to former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi on the 50th anniversary of the Emergency. "The BJP demands that the Congress government in Telangana roll back the names from Indira canteens to Annapurna canteens. What is the reason for the Congress government to rename the canteen, which is being run with funds from the state and GHMC, where people are fed for only ₹ 5? Is it a return gift to Indira Gandhi on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the emergency... This is nothing but a publicity stunt where the CM Revanth Reddy govt chooses to impress the Gandhi family", NV Subhash told ANI. BRS leader Krishank also slammed the government, stating that it should focus on fulfilling promises rather than changing names. He criticised the Congress government under Revanth Reddy for failing to bring in new schemes and pointed out that the name change was purely election-driven. "The Congress government under CM Revanth Reddy's rule has done nothing for Hyderabad. Earlier, the KSR government had a ₹ 5 Annapurna canteen for the poor, but now, as elections are approaching, Revanth Reddy's government has changed its name from Annapurna canteen to Indira Gandhi canteen. Why be a name changer, bring in new policies, and try to fulfil your 420 promises and guarantees that you have given? But the Congress government is all about changing names... This is really shameful... Revanth Reddy should stop pleasing the Gandhi family, stop being a Gulam to the Gandhi family, and instead try to please the voters who have voted for you", BRS leader Krishank said. Meanwhile, Congress leader Hanumantha Rao defended the decision, praising Indira Gandhi's contributions to the poor. He argued that the renaming was a fitting tribute to the former Prime Minister. Speaking to ANI, Congress Senior leader Hanumantha Rao said, 'The BRS government, under Annapurna Canteens, provided ₹ 5 meals. Today, under the leadership of Revanth Reddy, Indiramma Canteens provide meals at ₹ 5. They have taken this name because Indira Gandhi brought a revolution; she implemented land ceiling, nationalised banks, and ensured insurance for land labourers. Revanth Reddy's Indiramma Canteen is a fitting tribute. Every poor person who eats that ₹ 5 meal should remember Indira Gandhi, as the name is suitable. She brought a revolution in the lives of the poor. By adding her name, everyone will know about her work for the poor. The name for the canteens is fitting, and it should be maintained. Every poor person should eat the ₹ 5 meal and remember Indira Gandhi forever. This initiative is good, and I appreciate Revanth Reddy.'
