Sentences with phrase «federal judiciary system»

Not exact matches

«a new revolutionary era of permissiveness in this country fostered by the judiciary... I wish, therefore, wholly to disclaim any purpose on my part to hold that the Federal Constitution compels the teachers, parents, and elected school officials to surrender control of the American public school system to public school students.»

In his year - end report on the federal judiciary, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. revealed that the court is currently developing its own electronic filing system, which may be operational as soon as 2016.

PACER, of course, is the federal judiciary's system for obtaining case -LSB-...]

All transcripts of federal district and bankruptcy court proceedings will be available online through the federal judiciary's PACER system, the Judicial Conference announced today.

PACER, of course, is the federal judiciary's system for obtaining case and docket information electronically.

The feud involves RECAP, a program run by the Free Law Project (FLP) to collect documents downloaded from the federal judiciary's fee - based PACER system and make them available for free in a publicly accessible archive.

Thanks to this site, I now know that the federal judiciary maintains a site exclusively for law clerks, the Federal Law Clerk Information federal judiciary maintains a site exclusively for law clerks, the Federal Law Clerk Information Federal Law Clerk Information System.

Since a 1947 constitutional revision rewrote the state's judiciary article, New Jersey has operated under a modified federal system for appointment to the state's top courts (Supreme, Appellate Division of the Superior Court, and Superior Court) where governors appoint and the senate confirms any qualified person for an initial term of 7 years.

In his year - end report on the federal judiciary, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. revealed that the court is currently developing its own electronic filing system, which -LSB-...]

The federal judiciary violated federal law when it used Pacer fees for courtroom technology and other projects that don't provide the public with access to information stored in the courts» electronic docketing system, a federal judge has ruled.

Washington's court system is funded by Congress, but it isn't part of the federal judiciary.

This reformulation would explain why (as the Court held) a binding guidelines system violates the Constitution, but an advisory guidelines system does not: A binding guideline system (such as the prior federal sentencing system) would violate Apprendi because — and to the extent that — it allows the judiciary to increase the sentence beyond the maximum sentence established by the legislature or Commission, pursuant to facts the legislature or Commission has prescribed as important.

A significant note from the Duke Law Journal by Joanna Huang with the above title has been posted today September 29 on the Sentencing Law and Policy blog According to Ms. Huang, ``... in 1987 the United States political and social systems lost trust in the judiciary and severely limited its authority by enacting the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.»

A committee of federal judges found that any alleged misconduct, which occurred when the judge was still a federal prosecutor, fell outside the scope of the judiciary's discipline system.

National Veterans Legal Services Program, et al. v. United States (D.D.C.)(lead counsel for the plaintiffs in a class action challenging the fee structure of PACER, the federal judiciary's online public records system)

Of that, it will pay more than $ 5 million to each of the major legal research providers, WestLaw and LexisNexis, and pay $ 4 million for access to the federal judiciary's PACER system.