Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Duryee, 1t1 U.S. (7 Cranch) 481 [permanent dead link ] (1813), the United States Supreme Court ruled that the merits of a case, as settled by courts of one state, must be recognized by the courts of other states; state courts may not reopen cases which have been conclusively decided by the courts of another state.
Borden (1849) and Pacific States Telephone and Telegraph Co. v. Oregon (1912), the Supreme Court held that the enforcement of the Guarantee Clause is a nonjusticiable political question, to be decided by Congress or the President instead of the courts. [4] At the time of Luther, Rhode Island was the last state that did not adopt a constitution.
Quinto v. COMELEC (G.R. No. 189698) is a controversial decision of the Supreme Court of the Philippines which paved the way, albeit temporarily, for incumbent appointive executive officials to stay in office after filing their certificates of candidacy for election to an elective office.
The nomination and confirmation of justices to the Supreme Court of the United States involves several steps, the framework for which is set forth in the United States Constitution. Specifically, Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 , provides that the president of the United States nominates a justice and that the United States Senate provides ...
The rights, privileges, and immunities of citizens of the United States shall be respected in Puerto Rico to the same extent as though Puerto Rico were a State of the Union and subject to the provisions of paragraph 1 of section 2 of article IV of the Constitution of the United States. In the 1970s the Supreme Court began to recognize the ...
The Philippines' Supreme Court declared two parts of a controversial anti-terrorism law unconstitutional on Thursday, dismaying activists and rights groups who sought the scrapping of the ...
A group of administrative law scholars in support of the SEC argued in a friend of the court brief that if the justices were to rule that the SEC’s proceedings violate the Seventh Amendment’s ...
The Supreme Court continues to apply its public policy exception differently for state judgments as compared to state laws. In the 2003 case of Franchise Tax Board v. Hyatt, the Court reiterated that, "[o]ur precedent differentiates the credit owed to laws (legislative measures and common law) and to judgments." [1]