Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In law, standing or locus standi is a condition that a party seeking a legal remedy must show they have, by demonstrating to the court, sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged to support that party's participation in the case. A party has standing in the following situations:
Held that state taxpayers do not have standing to challenge to state tax laws in federal court. 9–0 Massachusetts v. EPA: 2007: States have standing to sue the EPA to enforce their views of federal law, in this case, the view that carbon dioxide was an air pollutant under the Clean Air Act. Cited Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Co. as precedent ...
Central to Hamilton's argument was his belief that the federal government would be representative of the people and that a federal legislature could be trusted with a standing military. [9] Federalist No. 26 was one of the more populist of the Federalist Papers, contrasting with the elitism that is present in many others.
Article III, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution states: The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to ...
When conducting legal research, part of the challenge is to figure out how to cite to items, or how to decipher a legal citation encountered in a primary or secondary source. The vendor neutral citation movement has developed to try to make citations more broadly understandable without specific reference to a particular guide to legal citation.
Maintaining American support for the federal government has been a recurring political issue in the United States and has been the subject of extensive academic research. Changes to American republicanism, including the scope of the federal government and how citizens are represented in Congress , have provided new factors that re-contextualize ...
The Federalist Papers later revisited the argument that the constitution must not put undue restrictions on the government that will be ignored, discussing it in Federalists No. 40, No. 41, and No. 48. [6] Federalist No. 25 has been cited in cases before the Supreme Court of the United States: Lewis F. Powell Jr. cited it in Selective Service ...
He argues that the primary purpose of government, and hence of the Constitution, is the people's happiness, and therefore only a government that promotes the people's happiness is legitimate, writing, "Were the plan of the Convention adverse to the public happiness, my voice would be, reject the plan. Were the Union itself inconsistent with the ...