Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145 (1878), was a Supreme Court of the United States case which held that religious duty was not a defense to a criminal indictment. [1] Reynolds was the first Supreme Court opinion to address the First Amendment's protection of religious liberties, impartial juries and the Confrontation Clauses of the Sixth ...
United States v. Reynolds, 345 U.S. 1 (1953), is a landmark legal case decided in 1953, ... a directed verdict in favor of the plaintiffs was granted by the trial court.
The state secrets privilege is related to, but distinct from, several other legal doctrines: the principle of non-justiciability in certain cases involving state secrets (the so-called "Totten Rule"); [6] certain prohibitions on the publication of classified information (as in New York Times Co. v. United States, the Pentagon Papers case); and the use of classified information in criminal ...
Supreme Court of the United States 38°53′26″N 77°00′16″W / 38.89056°N 77.00444°W / 38.89056; -77.00444 Established March 4, 1789 ; 235 years ago (1789-03-04) Location Washington, D.C. Coordinates 38°53′26″N 77°00′16″W / 38.89056°N 77.00444°W / 38.89056; -77.00444 Composition method Presidential nomination with Senate confirmation Authorised by ...
Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145 (1878) Miles v. United States, 103 U.S. 304 (1880) — established that the second wife may testify as to her husband's bigamy, because their marriage is not de jure; Clawson v. United States, 113 U.S. 143 (1885) — established cohabitation as unlawful; Murphy v.
Opinion: Kim Reynolds must have missed that the Supreme Court settled decades ago First Amendment rights extend to school, writes David W. Leslie.
Reynolds v. United States 565 U.S. 432 (2012) is a Supreme Court case regarding sex offender registration prior to enactment of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act. [ 1 ]
In United States v. Norton (1875), the Court held that the embezzlement of postal money orders was not an offense under the revenue laws. [85] In United States v. Spiegel (1886), the Court held that possession of an uncancelled stamp for imported liquors was not a crime unless it had been intentionally removed. [86]