Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
After the federal government moved to Washington, D.C., in 1800, the court had no permanent meeting location until 1810. When the architect Benjamin Henry Latrobe had the second U.S. Senate chamber built directly on top of the first U.S. Senate chamber, the Supreme Court took up residence in what is now referred to as the Old Supreme Court Chamber from 1810 through 1860. [6]
Daguerreotype of the Capitol, c. 1846. Construction of the Capitol began in 1792. When built, it was the only existing building for the use by the nation's legislature.In addition to Congress, the building was also designed to house the Library of Congress, the Supreme Court, the district courts, and other offices.
The Supreme Court first held oral argument in the building in 1923. [2] The building is part of the Ronald M. George State Office Complex (the San Francisco Civic Center Complex) along with the Hiram W. Johnson State Office Building. [3] The building's facade features granite and terra-cotta masonry and is done in the Beaux-Arts architectural ...
The building was named after Thurgood Marshall, the first African-American justice of the Supreme Court; and is part of the United States Capitol Complex under the Architect of the Capitol's Supreme Court Building and Grounds jurisdiction which it shares in common with the United States Supreme Court Building that houses the Supreme Court of ...
Earlier this year the U.S. Supreme Court interpreted an anti-employment discrimination statute in a pro-employee way. On Tuesday the Court did it again, in Staub v. Proctor. Staub is a U.S. Army ...
Generally, a state supreme court, like most appellate tribunals, is exclusively for hearing appeals of legal issues. Although state supreme court rulings on matters of state law are final, rulings on matters of federal law (generally made under the state court's concurrent jurisdiction) can be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States.
The California Supreme Court ruling curtails the ability of public employees in the state to seek help from the courts in labor disputes.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court disagreed in a 4-3 ruling and upheld the state taxes. It said the four programs were "charitable" and "educational," but not primarily religious.