Sentences with phrase «written court decision»

When you write a court decision that profoundly changes history, it's the first thing people ask about.

Photo by Kathleen Dooher When you write a court decision that profoundly changes history, it's the first thing people ask about.

Not exact matches

In his decision today, Judge Thomas B. Griffith, a George W. Bush appointee for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, writes:

The duty to consult with First Nations resides with the Federal government — as Chief Justice McLachlin wrote in the 2004 Haida Nation v. British Columbia [2004] decision of the Supreme Court, «the ultimate legal responsibility for consultation and accommodation rests with the Crown.»

In a decision released by the Baltimore Circuit Court, Judge Martin P. Welch wrote that the 35 - year - old was being granted a new trial because his initial council failed to properly cross-examine an expert from the state about the reliability of cell tower data that seemed to place him at the scene of the crime.

«A criminal defendant, we hold, need not request special interrogatories, nor need he acquiesce in the Government's request for discrete findings by the jury, in order to preserve in full a timely - raised objection to jury instructions,» Justice J. Ginsburg wrote in her explanation of the court's decision.

Also cited on the DOJ's explanation of the statute is a decision from former Supreme Court Chief Justice William Howard Taft, who wrote, «To conspire to defraud the United States means primarily to cheat the Government out of property or money.»

The court of appeals heard oral arguments last month and is expected to issue a written decision sometime this fall.

In 2015, he also wrote the dissenting judgment in R. v. Nur, a 6 - 3 decision in which he argued the court should have shown judicial restraint and upheld the three - year mandatory minimum sentence for illegal possession of a loaded firearm.

Particularly in light of the Court's 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, which struck down Washington D.C.'s handgun ban and found Americans had an individual right to a firearm — a 5 - 4 decision in which Stevens wrote the primary dissenting opinion — Stevens called the Second Amendment a barrier to «constructive gun control legislation.»

I've written elsewhere (and will have more to say soon, since I've got a lecture deadline) about the Supreme Court's quite breathtaking (in a good way) decision in the Arizona tuition tax credit case.

Writing in Crisis, he observes that a crisis of conscience is created when the courts not only countenance the killing of the innocent but also decree, as in the Casey decision, that moral objection to such injustice is an offense against the constitutional order.

For my good friends at the Georgia Family Council, I wrote a post on a recent decision by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Jennifer Keeton's suit against faculty and administrators in the graduate counseling program at Augusta State University.

Father Reese writes: «I agree with those who believe that the California Supreme Court's decision was unwise, but I would oppose a constitutional amendment that would forbid gay marriages.

This is similar to the way Supreme Court decisions are often written, appealing to previous decisions as a legal basis for current rulings.

In a 5 - 4 decision written by Kennedy, the Supreme Court allowed Greece, New York, to continue hosting prayers before its monthly town board meetings - even though an atheist and a Jewish citizen complained that the benedictions are almost always explicitly Christian.

Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, a man on the opposite side of the political fence from Eisenhower, said much the same thing in a 1952 Supreme Court decision when he wrote, «We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote a dissenting opinion, which means that the Supreme Court upheld Westboro by an 8 - 1 decision.

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.

And so, if Justice Kennedy, writing for the Court, sweeps away the last barriers to same — sex marriage, what will be contained in the «principle» he articulates as the ground of the decision that would indeed bar marriage to:

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.

Here's what Dr. Gruber wrote, describing his research into the economic effects of the abortion license imposed on the United States in the 1973 Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade:

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.»

write a few days after the Grand Panjandrum of Judicial Overreach, Justice Anthony Kennedy, bestowed upon a grateful world his Supreme Court decision regarding same - sex marriage.

We took this one to the Supreme Court, and the decision, written by Chief Justice White, held that the First Amendment does not protect private censorship by the broadcaster and that, between the right of the broadcaster and the right of the listeners and viewers, «it is the right of the viewers and listeners that is paramount.»

According to CSW, the Administrative Court recently decided to dismiss the case, but the judge had not delivered his written decision, which prevented the churches» lawyers from appealing the decision.

Ziegler writes: «[F] or the better part of a decade after the Court's decision, the vast majority of lawyers, law professors, and grassroots activists in the antiabortion movement opposed efforts to strip the Court of its authority or to return the abortion question to democratic politics....

In his lower court decision upholding the health care law, conservative Judge Laurence Silberman (seen here getting the Congressional Medal of Freedom from President George W. Bush) wrote

«It is with great compunction that this Court renders this decision as this Court recognizes the benefit that such a law would provide,» Judge Wright wrote in his decision, going on to question «the wisdom in the Mayor's zeal for the possibility of welcoming to New York City a business that would pay its building service employees less than the prevailing wage.»

Twenty - two Senate Democrats wrote Cuomo a letter urging him to keep his word and exercise his veto authority, reasoning that the courts will have more leeway to redraw the lines if he does — thanks to the recent Texas decision that some saw as upholding the primacy of the Legislature when it comes to redistricting.

She finished her book, «Corruption in America ``, and had just written a letter to the Supreme Court regarding the Citizens United decision.

The city of Baltimore took down monuments to Lee, Jackson and pre-Civil War Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger Taney, who wrote the majority decision in the Dred Scott Case, ruling that the descendants of slaves were not US citizens.

Dunn wrote that in light of the hearing officer's findings and several court decisions in Rea's favor, it was clear that the city was engaged in a misguided and futile legal battle.

Absent a decision from that panel, Judge Valerie Caproni wrote in brief court papers, the case is likely to run from April 16 through the end of May 2018.

Court of Appeals Chief Judge Janet DiFiore wrote in her decision that state law makes it clear the vacancy rent increase should be counted when figuring if an apartment has reached the deregulation threshold.

«While the courts have made their decision, old habits die hard and the Senate Republicans are refusing to accept a change in the status quo,» Democrats write.

Notwithstanding these petitions, this Court can not make new law based upon a political party's agenda,» Richmond County Supreme Court Judge Phil Minardo wrote in a 19 - page decision issued Friday.

«The court fully recognizes that a permanent primary date is best left to New York, but has acted as it must to preserve federally protected voting rights,» Sharpe wrote in the decision.

«FERC set an August 7, 2016 deadline for all decisions on federal authorizations relating to the [project],» lawyers for Millennium wrote in a 32 - page brief filed Monday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

In conjunction with the U.S. Supreme Court decision to strike down aggregate contribution limits, the lack of real reform in the New York State budget empowers the 1 percent, wrote Katrina vanden Heuvel in the Washington Post.

In a Journal News op - ed, Lawrence Norden and Frederick A.O Schwarz of the Brennan Center, wrote that Governor Cuomo's refusal to pass meaningful reform in the state budget was especially disheartening in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission.

Madden declined to comment on her ruling, but court spokesman David Bookstaver said, «Judge Madden's decision was essentially written, substantively, five to six weeks ago.

«Even if the court were to accept the defendant's view that the U.S. Attorney's comments were improper, there is no evidence that the U.S. Attorney's comments «substantial [ly] influenced» the grand jury's decision to indict,» Ms. Caproni wrote.

Citing case law, the five justices wrote in a unanimous decision that the court's jurisdiction extends to challenges to absentee ballots based upon nonresidency.

In one decision, a State Supreme Court judge wrote, «the officer's conduct was not justified from its inception.»

But it's provision number 10 in the 10 point plan that's garnered most of the attention - a measure to write into New York State law the abortion rights protections spelled out in the 1973 Supreme Court decision Roe v Wade.

Within weeks of this year's federal court decisions — which examined and vindicated both the MMR vaccine and thimerosal — environmental lawyer Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wrote a column in The Huffington Post in which he continued to press his case that the government has peddled unsafe vaccines to an unsuspecting public.

The court's 7 - 2 decision, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, was undeniably a setback for Stanford's legal team.

Judge Susan Illston wrote in her opinion that she invalidated the patent, held by the San Diego, California - based company Sequenom, based on several recent rulings, including the Supreme Court's decision denying patent claims on BRCA genes used in cancer risk testing.

NIH has appealed the decision, and as I am writing, the appeals court has lifted the injunction pending consideration of the full appeal.