Sentences with phrase «decision of a court of law»

Since when did it become the ethical practice of any responsible and respected lawyer committed to the rule of law, independence of the judiciary, the independence of the legal profession, constitutionalism and democracy to resort to the print and electronic media as the medium of arguing an appeal or review of the decision of a Court of law he has lost?

A judgment is a decision of a court of law.

Not exact matches

This summer's Supreme Court 6 - 3 decision to uphold a key part of the ACA ensured that the 2010 legislation would remain the law of the land.

Until retailers get more clarity in the form of the Court's decision and / or a legislative agenda, there's no telling what will be the law of the land.

«Not since before Roe v. Wade has a law or court decision had the potential to devastate access to reproductive healthcare on such a sweeping scale,» Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, told Bloomberg earlier this year.

An appeals court has overturned a previous court decision that had said Ford violated the province's conflict of interest law.

The cases involve the use of a landmark voting rights law that led to the election of African - Americans across the South and Supreme Court decisions that limited the use of race to draw electoral maps.

Different administrators have come to different conclusions about how best to apply the law in view of the science, and many of their decisions have been challenged in court, sometimes successfully, for either going too far or not far enough.

The court's decision will allow more room for innovation, and consumers will have more choices to determine for themselves how they access and experience the internet,» Verizon's general counsel of public policy, law and security, Randal Milch, said after the ruling was handed down.

As the employer, you need to be informed of the law and your obligations, both of which may change as a result of new legislation and court decisions.

The judge said in a 91 - page decision that, while the Army Corps substantially complied with the National Environmental Policy Act, federal permits issued for the pipeline violated the law in some respects, saying in a court order the Corps did not «adequately consider the impacts of an oil spill on fishing rights, hunting rights, or environmental justice.»

A Supreme Court of Canada decision that upheld a registration requirement for those sponsoring election advertising in British Columbia could be important for other provinces, says University of Ottawa assistant law professor Michael Pal.

«This morning, following the re-opening, we were notified of a deed by the court of Florence requesting the immediate closure of BitGrail and this situation will persist until a decision is made by the courts, about the precautionary suspension request made by the Bonelli law office on behalf of a client.»

A recent decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (Philadelphia Taxi Association v. Uber Technologies) reinforces the longstanding principle that antitrust laws protect competition, not competitors.

Not one executive of any major Wall Street firm that caused the financial crash in 2008 through fraudulent activities was prosecuted by the U.S. Justice Department — which was headed at the time by law partners from Covington & Burling — the Big Tobacco law firm that was singled out in a Federal Court decision for hiding the deadly effects of cigarette smoke for decades.

That petition challenges a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decision that, as the Cato Institute, Reason Foundation, and a group of law professors explained in a supporting amicus brief, exacerbates a «system» already «stacked in favor of the government.»

It has committed to reviewing and reconciling laws and policies with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and the Supreme Court's Tsilhqot «in decision.

Courts have made clear for eighty years that they will not review the Fed's decision about monetary policy, including when those decisions require novel interpretations of law.

A proactive estate strategy will place you — not state law or courts — in control of decisions about the care of your children, your assets and your health care.

There are many pundits trying to place probabilities on the court's decision but I am not briefed enough in the BASIC LAW of Germany to even try to make that bold a prediction.

Mexico's Supreme Court upholds a law in the state of Baja California that states life begins at conception, in a decision hailed by anti-abortion campaigners.

And the decisions made in forced arbitration proceedings are final — meaning in most cases they can't be appealed in a court of law.

But even with this restriction, there should be considerable opportunity to argue that international law might inform such matters as: the content of the duty to consult, the significance of the right to culture, the respect that should be accorded to indigenous conceptions of property, and the question of what might constitute an unjustifiable infringement of an aboriginal right or title or a treaty right: see my post on the Supreme Court's Grassy Narrows decision here.

And should the Supreme Court be unwise enough to impose same - sex marriage on the whole country, the decision will be greeted not like Loving v. Virginia (overturning antimiscegenation laws in 1967), as an achievement of obvious justice, but like Roe v. Wade, with a tireless movement dedicated to overturning its obvious injustice, and a reinvigorated effort to pass a federal marriage amendment.

We are ruled by words ¯ words of encouragement, words of persuasion, and words that end up being laws, regulations, and court decisions.

Diocesan lawyers filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Hartford May 29 asking that a decision by the Connecticut Office of State Ethics determining the Bridgeport Diocese was subject to laws governing lobbying organizations be overturned.

That's how I read the Supreme Court's decision not to hear cases in which lower courts ruled that marriage laws in various states that recognize unions only of a man and a woman are unconstitutional.

In Smith, the Court interpreted its First Amendment decisions as holding «that the right of free exercise does not relieve an individual of the obligation to comply with a «valid and neutral law of general applicability on the ground that the law proscribes (or prescribes) conduct that his religion prescribes (or proscribes)»» (id.

Lively, with representation by Liberty Counsel (an evangelical legal organization), responded that in both the U.S. and Uganda he exercised constitutionally protected speech rights; that he opposes violence and neither committed nor plotted any; that Uganda did not in fact pass a proposed draconian anti-gay law, and that in any case Uganda's political institutions, instead of himself, are responsible for its political decisions; and that the court lacks jurisdiction and the plaintiffs lack standing.

If the will of the state is to comply with the law, then the court can come to only one decision: to refuse to uphold the justice ministry's suit.»

The Supreme Court's decision upholding a ban on partialbirth abortions, Gonzales v. Carhart, «is a significant step in the right direction — moving away from the infamous «abortion distortion» in Supreme Court jurisprudence and bringing their interpretation of abortion law more in line with other fields of law».

Reuters: Saudi clerics protest against appointing women to advisory body Dozens of Saudi clerics staged a rare protest in front of the Royal Court on Tuesday against King Abdullah's decision to appoint women to a body that advises the government on new laws, a sign of growing conservative unease at modest social reforms.

Perhaps most famously, several years ago Hastings College of the Law withdrew recognition from the Christian Legal Society, resulting in a 2010 Supreme Court decision in favor of Hastings.

In a 5 - 4 decision this morning, the Supreme Court said that a California law school can require a Christian group to open its leadership positions to all students, including those who disagree with the group's statement of faith.

Striking down the law, of course, changes the burden of proof: Absent a Court decision, Republicans have the perhaps futile task of getting it negated through executive / legislative means.

And, indeed, this was done in the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that declared the Washington State law prohibiting physician - assisted suicide to be unconstitutional on the grounds that it violated the guarantee of personal liberty in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.

Bishop Robert Vasa of Baker, Oregon, wrote a moving reflection on the Court's decision, which included this: «For the victims of Oregon's assisted - suicide law the world has become a place that they feel is not worth living in.

A friend who has been teaching a course on constitutional law for a couple of decades and has achieved a national reputation confided recently that he plans to stop teaching the course; there just isn't any integrity to the subject, and it becomes almost a degrading experience to have to teach, say, equal protection doctrine and pretend that the Court's decisions are the product of any sort of coherent thinking.

The British court cited a South African decision from 2000, which acknowledged the difficulty of determining religious exemptions from obedience to laws.

On many points, decisions of Islamic religious courts have the force of national law (a touchy issue when a dispute involves a Muslim and a non-Muslim, or when one spouse in an existing marriage converts to Islam and makes the other members of the family subject to Shari'a determinations on matters such as child custody).

Writing in the Baylor Law Review before the Romer decision, David Smolin of Samford University Law School argues that the present Court» rejecting «religiously based» claims as inherently particularistic» is increasingly dismissing «traditional theists» as too absolutist to join in public debate in a pluralistic society.

Like most constitutional law professors, Carter is sharply critical of the Supreme Court's 1990 decision in Employment Division v. Smith.

Superior Court Judge Gary Gavenus made the decision after a member of the jury handed out three documents to fellow jurors including North Carolina case law, according to the AP.

Overturning a lower court's decision that ruled that the laws unconstitutionally limited access to abortion in the state, New Orleans - based 5th Circuit Court of Appeals judges wrote, «on its face does not impose an undue burden on the life and health of a woman.&rcourt's decision that ruled that the laws unconstitutionally limited access to abortion in the state, New Orleans - based 5th Circuit Court of Appeals judges wrote, «on its face does not impose an undue burden on the life and health of a woman.&rCourt of Appeals judges wrote, «on its face does not impose an undue burden on the life and health of a woman.»

In this decision the Supreme Court of the nation established the doctrine of «separate but equal» as the law of the land.

The current FCC majority may reject such petitions, but the petitioners have standing to challenge an FCC decision in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where adherence to the law may be expected.

«In light of the unforeseeable changes in established first amendment law set forth in recent decisions of the United States Supreme Court,» the court said, «justice demands that we analyze the present case in light of the protections found in the Minnesota Constitution.&rCourt,» the court said, «justice demands that we analyze the present case in light of the protections found in the Minnesota Constitution.&rcourt said, «justice demands that we analyze the present case in light of the protections found in the Minnesota Constitution.»

The occasion for Lincoln's declaration of implacable opposition to judicial supremacy had been a decision which, above all others, stained the Court's reputation as an institution dedicated to, as it says above the entrance to the Marble Temple in Washington, D.C., «equal justice under law.»

After all, the Court could have come down, as the German Constitutional Court did in a 1975 decision interpreting Germany's Basic Law, in precisely the opposite way — invalidating a legislatively enacted liberalization of abortion.

In developing his notion of «curricular neutrality,» Nord takes on issues of linguistics and philosophy, but his main concern is the constitutional law produced by the Supreme Court's decisions on church and state.