Sentences with phrase «judging under the constitution»

A final word should be said on the relation of judging under the Constitution to larger political or ideological issues.

Pursuant to Article III of the Constitution, justices of the Supreme Court, circuit judges and district judges receive lifetime appointments and protection against reduction in salary.3 Congress created the bankruptcy courts pursuant to its power under Article I of the Constitution and Article I bankruptcy judges do not enjoy the tenure and salary protections afforded to Article III judges under the Constitution.

Not exact matches

In Lucia v. SEC, the argument centered on the question of whether administrative judges are wielding the power to settle cases decisively and issue orders, even though they are not appointed and confirmed as judges according to the form prescribed under Article III of the Constitution.

Like others who support the original understanding of the Constitution, I disagree with many of the Supreme Court's decisions under the establishment clause, but in our system of government a federal - district judge like Judge Jones is bound by those decisjudge like Judge Jones is bound by those decisJudge Jones is bound by those decisions.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

SERAP believes that the effect of the non-payment of salaries and allowances of judges is to reduce the purchasing power of judges, diminish the benefits to which they are entitled under the 1999 Constitution (as amended), and ultimately weaken the judiciary, which is the last hope of the common man.»

She's not acting on behalf of the Supreme Court; she is acting under her own (pretty vast) authority as a federal judge under Article III of the Constitution, and issuing the order from a district court.

Under «Australia's» Constitution all Australian politicians, judges, lawyers and many others must swear allegiance to a Sovereignty that has not existed for more than 86 years.

A state judge has struck down Kentucky's school - finance system, saying it «bears no rational relationship» to the state's duty under its constitution to provide «an efficient system of common schools.»

Kentucky must equalize spending among school districts, revise its tax system, and significantly boost its share of school revenues if it is to fulfill its obligation to children under the state constitution, an advisory committee appointed by a state trial judge has concluded.

In a 70 - page opinion, U.S. District Judge Richard P. Matsch released the Denver schools from 21 years of federal oversight and upheld a 1974 amendment to the state constitution prohibiting districts not under federal desegregation orders from busing children for racial balance.

LOS ANGELES — A California judge ruled Tuesday that teacher tenure laws deprived students of their right to an education under the State Constitution and violated their civil rights.

Jepsen lightly approached the question of where Judge Thomas Moukawsher's broad indictment of public K - 12 education was right or wrong as a matter of policy, but the appeal sharply attacks the judge's legal basis for ruling that shortcomings he identified violate students» rights under the state Constitution to a free and adequate educaJudge Thomas Moukawsher's broad indictment of public K - 12 education was right or wrong as a matter of policy, but the appeal sharply attacks the judge's legal basis for ruling that shortcomings he identified violate students» rights under the state Constitution to a free and adequate educajudge's legal basis for ruling that shortcomings he identified violate students» rights under the state Constitution to a free and adequate education.

Last month, a California judge in Vergara v. State of California ruled that teacher tenure laws deprive students of their right to an education under the state Constitution and violate their civil rights.

AKC Group Judge Richard Beauchamp, who had so ably guided the Bichon to recognition, was invited to serve on the MBTCA Board of Directors and by 1985 the Stud Book and the Constitution and Bylaws were under revision.

Under Article 163 of the Spanish Constitution, ordinary judges may submit a «constitutional question'to the SCC when, in the midst of a case, they are confronted with an applicable and relevant legal provision that they think is inconsistent with the Constitution.

All Superior Court judges are appointed by the federal government and derive their inherent jurisdiction from their appointments under section 96 of the Constitution Act.

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges and other public officials in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

My own view is that judges should work under a presumption that the legislature dutifully considered the Constitution and sought to keep the law within the bounds of the Constitution, but should also be prepared to rebut that presumption and, as I said in my last article, «vigorously enforce» Charter protections.

Questioned about rights of privacy, the appellate judge cited several amendments in the Bill of Rights and said, «I do think the right to privacy is protected under the Constitution in various ways.»

Writing for a unanimous court, Judge Dolores Sloviter wrote: «gambling, even in the home, simply does not involve any individual interests of the same constitutional magnitude» as sexual privacy laws, and therefore «is not protected by any right to privacy under the Constitution.»

Yes but expect that there would be a constitutional challenge under section 96 of the Constitution Act, and whether before 1867, copyright matters could be adjudicated before inferior courts presided over by provincially appointed judges.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Judge White agreed with Davis Polk that the plaintiffs lacked standing under Article III of the Constitution, and dismissed all claims with prejudice.

sorry but acquitted conduct under our constitution didn't happen at least as far as the individual facing the judge is concerned.

HB 4103 Authorizes a judge of a municipal court not reappointed by the 91st day following the expiration of a term of office who continues to serve for another term of office to continue to perform the duties of the office without taking an additional oath or affirmation otherwise required under the Texas Constitution.

More than 20 years ago, when I took my oath of office to serve as a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, I solemnly swore to «administer justice without respect to persons,» to «do equal right to the poor and to the rich,» and to «faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me... under the Constitution and laws of the United States.»

Yesterday, the New York Court of Appeals ruled that same - sex couples have no right to marry under the New York state constitution, while Georgia's high court reaffirmed a ban on same - sex marriages, as reported in NY High Court Ends Same Sex Marriage Fight (NYLJ 7/6/06) and New York Judges Reject Rights to Gay Marriage (NY Times 7/7/06).

The Volokh Conspirators are deep into the fine print in their posts on a 43 - page opinion issued yesterday by Judge Joseph Bataillon, a Clinton appointee to the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska, who has struck down a 2000 amendment to the Nebraska Constitution limiting marriage under Nebraska state law to opposite sex relationships (Citizens for Equal Protection v. Bruning).

Specifically, it finds a judge who uses only a Wentworth instruction commits «an act of maladministration» which is grounds for impeachment under Art. 38 of the New Hampshire Constitution.

Thus it will be seen by these quotations from the opinion that the court, after stating the question it was about to decide in a manner too plain to be misunderstood, proceeded to decide it, and announced, as the opinion of the tribunal, that in organizing the judicial department of the Government in a Territory of the United States, Congress does not act under, and is not restricted by, the third article in the Constitution, and is not bound, in a Territory, to ordain and establish courts in which the judges hold their offices during good behaviour, but may exercise the discretionary power which a State exercises in establishing its judicial department and regulating the jurisdiction of its courts, and may authorize the Territorial Government to establish, or may itself establish, courts in which the judges hold their offices for a term of years only, and may vest in them judicial power upon subjects confided to the judiciary of the United States.

104 (1) Subject to the provisions of the Constitution, the Chief Justice may by order under his hand transfer a case at any stage of the proceedings from any Judge or Magistrate to any other Judge or Magistrate and from one court to another court of competent jurisdiction at any time or stage of the proceedings and either with or without an application from any of the parties to the proceedings.

The Commission is the only entity authorized under the Kentucky Constitution to take disciplinary action against a sitting Kentucky judge.

Nor do we think that this historic trial practice, which long has served the selection of an impartial jury, should be abolished because of an apprehension that prosecutors and trial judges will not perform conscientiously their respective duties under the Constitution.

The Judges of the Supreme Court and District Judges to be elected at the first election under this Constitution shall qualify and enter upon the duties of their respective offices on the first Monday of December succeeding their election.

Under Article VI of the Constitution: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws Under Article VI of the Constitution: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of...

Article VI, Clause 2 of the US Constitution, known as the Supremacy Clause, says This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound...

I've seen what happens to many of these people in court, when they stand up and try to explain to the judge how they are «Mennonites» who can't be found guilty under the Constitution because it's a violation of their rights dating back centuries before America existed, or when they challenge the judge's right to preside over their case because of some arcane law, or that red light cameras are unconstitutional because they do not get to confront their accusers, again, I cringe, because I know what's coming.

By the power vested in the chief judge under article V, section 2 (d), Florida Constitution; section 43.26, Florida Statutes; and Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.215 (b)(2), it is therefore ORDERED:

In August 2010, California's Proposition 8 was declared unconstitutional under the U.S. Constitution in a federal court case, Perry v. Schwarzenegger, but the ruling has been stayed pending appeal by a higher court; the judge found the ban unconstitutional, ruling that «Proposition 8 disadvantages gays and lesbians without any rational justification.»