Sentences with phrase «not judicial precedent»

Not exact matches

While I find the majority opinion in Brown disappointing and even more so the fact that its author was Scalia, in the end there is something for conservatives to take away from the case: a strong judicial precedent that new categories may not be added to the type of content not afforded full First Amendment protection.

The judicial precedent for equal protection for federal laws is somewhat fuzzy as there is not equal protection clause specifically written as part of the fifth amendment, and the specific clause is only in reference to states in the fourteenth amendment.

Public participation (described as access to information and judicial remedy, as well as participation in decision making) in development projects not only has legal precedent in international accords but also has been incorporated into the procedures of international lending organizations.

[M] aybe divisions of appellate courts think that if they ignore their own precedents they won't get called on this by their colleagues, especially if a judge on the appellate panel was part of the panel deciding the precedents; or there's nobody outside the court (who might matter) to to complain because it's an appellate court of final resort; or it's an inferior appellate court but the panel has good reason to believe the final appellate court won't grant leave to appeal.Whatever the reason, such judicial conduct unacceptable.

Judicial precedent interpreting state wage and hour laws did not impose personal liability for violations.

Finally, although we do not have a justice of precedents, it is a fact that the volume of judicial disputes leads the Judges to create a base of decision criteria and it needs to be very well known by the law office to guarantee maximum performance in the defence of its clients.

Mr. Sirota offers quite a bit to chew on in just over 1000 words, but his argument, as I understand it, boils down to the following propositions: 1) Judges must generally apply the law as written and should work to foster stable legal doctrine, 2) In applying the law, judges can not avoid making moral and value - laden judgments; and 3) Judicial moralizing is, to a certain extent, desirable due to «democratic process failures,» meaning that the legislative process is not properly responding to the changing will of the people (Mr. Sirota also discusses briefly the circumstances in which courts should be permitted to overrule precedents.

[18] Paragraph (d)(2) recognizes that a lawyer may provide legal services in a jurisdiction in which the lawyer is not licensed when authorized to do so by federal or other law, which includes statute, court rule, executive regulation or judicial precedent.

If mediation supplants rights - based dispute resolution, this does not mean villanry, but it does mean that a generation later, the machinery for asserting rights (civil trial lawyers and judges, judicial precedent) will likely be rusty and broken.

As it is so drastic, and in the absence of a direct benefit to the child, judicial approval is unlikely, not least because it could set a precedent for every family with a severely disabled child.

If the Supreme Court does not review this jurisdictional issue, then there will be established a precedent which will void the Doctrine of Judicial Immunity.

It is, arguably, a specific instance of the broader question of how the law ought to deal with unusual situations on which precedent is lacking; as I observed here, in a post prompted, in part, by prof. Magliocca's musings on the subject of judicial review of unusual statutes, that broader question is not an easy one.

If the preemption provisions of this regulation do not apply, the covered entity must comply with the requirements or limitations established by such other law, regulation or judicial precedent.

, 75 Notre Dame L. Rev. 221, 221 (1999)(«A judicial precedent requires not only an aggrieved party who files a lawsuit, but also that the case goes to trial, and perhaps appeal, without a settlement.»).

Of course, in light of the current composition of the U.S. Senate and the current President, and the precedent that the «nuclear option» can abolish the filibuster for some kinds of judicial appointments (a parliamentary ruling which is almost surely not justiciable due to express language vesting procedural questions in the U.S. Senate in the Senate and not the courts in the U.S. Constitution), this question is unlikely to present itself any time soon.

The essence of judicial pragmatism, or at least my version of it, is recognition that difficult cases — and they are legion in our system — can not be resolved at the appellate level by a distinctive process of reasoning called «legal reasoning,» emphasizing careful parsing of text and scrupulous adherence to precedent and an analytical method that resembles deductive logic.

But the Constitution also does not say anything about Originalism, Textualism, Living Constitutionalism, social science, canons of construction, precedent, interpretive methodology, history and purpose, or any other of the ordinary methods of judicial analysis.

This argument is not without judicial precedent.