Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Hatch Act of 1939, An Act to Prevent Pernicious Political Activities, is a United States federal law that prohibits civil-service employees in the executive branch of the federal government, [2] except the president and vice president, [3] from engaging in some forms of political activity. It became law on August 2, 1939.
(4) The case is a judicable question, not exempted by the political question doctrine; the constitutionality of a statute is a question for the courts. The court then presented its affirmative reasoning: (5) When the Constitution provides express procedures, such procedures must be strictly observed.
A new suit, brought by the National Coalition for Men, charged that with the removal of service restrictions, the Selective Service System's men-only requirement failed the Equal Protection clause. Judge Gray H. Miller of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas ruled in National Coalition for Men v.
In Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983), the Supreme Court considered such a case, in which the Attorney General had found that deporting an essentially stateless person would result in extreme hardship, and the House had vetoed the Attorney General's decision.
National Labor Relations Board v Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation, 301 U.S. 1 (1937), was a United States Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of the National Labor Relations Act of 1935, also known as the Wagner Act.
McClung argued that the Civil Rights Act was unconstitutional, at least as applied to a small, private business such as his. McClung further argued that the amount of food purchased by Ollie's that actually crossed state lines (about half of the food at Ollie's) was so minuscule that Ollie's effectively had no effect on interstate commerce (although McClung admitted that a significant amount ...
The United States government filed a petition for certiorari, whereby the Court has discretion to hear or to decline a particular case, for Supreme Court review and the Court accepted the case. To sustain the Act, the government was obligated to show that §922(q) was a valid exercise of the Congressional Commerce Clause power, [D] i.e. that ...
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952), also commonly referred to as the Steel Seizure Case or the Youngstown Steel case, [1] was a landmark United States Supreme Court decision that limited the power of the president of the United States to seize private property.