At that time, the ENIAC was considered to be the first computer in the modern sense, but in 1973 a U. S. District Court invalidated the ENIAC patent and concluded that the ENIAC inventors had derived the subject matter of the electronic digital computer from Atanasoff ( see Patent dispute ).

In 1392, peace with the Southern Court being concluded, the Period of the Northern and Southern Courts came to an end.

Scholars have pointed out the Supreme Court itself already had engaged in judicial review before Marbury, although it had not struck down the statute in question because it concluded that the statute was constitutional.

The Court concluded that the United States, despite its objections, was subject to the Court's jurisdiction.

Justice Hugo Black adopted Jefferson's words in the voice of the Court, and concluded that " government must be neutral among religions and nonreligion: it cannot promote, endorse, or fund religion or religious institutions.

The Court concluded that limits on campaign contributions " serve the basic governmental interest in safeguarding the integrity of the electoral process without directly impinging upon the rights of individual citizens and candidates to engage in political debate and discussion.

1, § 20 represents an important public policy " which the Newspaper violated " when it terminated employment because they exercised free speech " In examining the court precedent, the Wyoming Supreme Court concluded that " erminating an at-will employee for exercising his right to free speech by refusing to follow a legal directive of an employer on the employer's premises during working hours does not violate public policy.

The Court concluded that Jones was a bailee to the car, because the car's owner had regularly permitted him to use the car, and so had a property interest in the car.

In December 1968, the Journal of Medical Genetics published the first XYY review article — by Michael Court Brown, director of the MRC Human Genetics Unit — which reported no overrepresentation of XYY males in nationwide chromosome surveys of prisons and hospitals for the developmentally disabled and mentally ill in Scotland, and concluded that studies confined to institutionalized XYY males may be guilty of selection bias, and that long-term longitudinal prospective studies of newborn XYY boys were needed.

The vast majority of legal scholars have concluded that in writing the Schenck opinion Justice Holmes never meant to replace the " bad tendency " test which had been established in the 1868 English case R. v. Hicklin and incorporated into American jurisprudence in the 1904 Supreme Court case U. S. ex rel.

" The U. S. Supreme Court, however, has concluded that courts have wide discretion to fashion relief in cases of equity.

The report concluded that " there exists a significant level of duplication of administrative structures and corporate services across the Family Court and the FMC and that the existing and proposed duplication is not financially sustainable ".

Early on, in the so-called Civil Rights Cases decided in 1883, the Supreme Court concluded that the Congressional enforcement power in Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment did not authorize Congress to use the Privileges or Immunities Clause of that amendment to ban racial discrimination in public accommodations operated by private persons, such as inns and theaters.

In the Katzenbach v. Morgan case, decided in 1966, the Supreme Court concluded that Congress can forbid practices that are not themselves unconstitutional, if the law is aimed at preventing or remedying constitutional violations.

" Nevertheless, Greene concluded that, " lack of clarity about the Florida Supreme Court ’ s views on the safe-harbor provision should have resulted in a remand to that court for clarification ," in addition to the remand of December 4.

There are numerous instances where the US Supreme Court has found that state courts have reasonably concluded that " the health, safety, morals, or general welfare " would be promoted by prohibiting particular contemplated uses of land.

The state trial court, upon remand, concluded that the amendment could not pass strict scrutiny, which the Colorado Supreme Court agreed with upon review.

Has the Court concluded that the perceived social harm of polygamy is a " legitimate concern of government ," and the perceived social harm of homosexuality is not?

Later, in Samson v. California, the Supreme Court ruled that reasonable suspicion is not even necessary: " The California Legislature has concluded that, given the number of inmates the State paroles and its high recidivism rate, a requirement that searches be based on individualized suspicion would undermine the State's ability to effectively supervise parolees and protect the public from criminal acts by reoffenders.

Finally, the Court concluded that the legislation must be intended to punish ; legislation enacted for otherwise legitimate purposes could be saved so long as punishment was a side-effect rather than the main purpose of the law.

The Committee concluded " that the interest which a great number of officers and clerks have in the proceedings of the Court of Chancery, has been a principal cause of extending bills, answers, pleadings, examinations and other forms and copies of them, to an unnecessary length, to the great delay of justice and the oppression of the subject ".

The Court concluded that " the means chosen as substitutes for the invalidated ' grandfather clause ' were themselves invalid under the Fifteenth Amendment.

Schenck v. United States,, was a United States Supreme Court decision that upheld the Espionage Act of 1917 and concluded that a defendant did not have a First Amendment right to express freedom of speech against the draft during World War I.

This effect was re-affirmed in Bowers v. Kerbaugh-Empire Co., 271 U. S. 170 ( 1926 ), in which the Supreme Court reviewed Pollock, the Corporation Excise Tax Act of 1909 and the Sixteenth Amendment, and concluded that " t was not the purpose or effect of that amendment to bring any new subject within the taxing power.

Judge Judith F. Hayes stated in her ruling, "... the Court finds the general purpose of the website to be a free speech forum wherein Defendant criticized the management of Plaintiff.

The European Court held that the government's refusal of registration "... had no lawful basis ... the Moscow authorities did not act in good faith and neglected their duty of neutrality and impartiality vis-à-vis the applicant's religious community.

In 1829 Mr. Bartlett petitioned the Sussex County Court for a license to "... keep an Inn or Tavern in the house in which he now lives, in the Township of Byram ..." It was signed by the 16 town council members ( referred to as Freeholders !).

According to Samuel L. French, author of Reminiscences of Plymouth, Luzerne County, Penna., "... the present Borough of Plymouth was erected by decree of Honorable John N. Conyngham, President Judge of the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County, on the 23rd day of April, A. D., 1866, upon the recommendation of the Grand Jury ..."

In Loving v. Virginia, the United States Supreme Court overturned state marriage laws that barred interracial marriages on the basis that marriage is a " basic civil right ..." and that "... the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.

* The cost-benefit analysis, first introduced by Judge Posner from the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in the Aimster case, holds that a manufacturer of technological device will enjoy the Sony safe-harbor only if "... it would have been disproportionately costly for him to eliminate or at least reduce substantially the infringing uses.

The Court ruled: "... Congress intended to adopt the common law definition of conspiracy, which does not make the doing of any act other than the act of conspiring a condition of liability ..." This ruling indicated that conspiracy alone can be criminal.

During 1665 – 66 Sidney wrote Court Maxims, in which he argued for a reversal of the Restoration of the monarchy: "... as death is the greatest evil that can befall a person, monarchy is the worst evil that can befall a nation ".

* 1889 – A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court by Mark Twain comments on how commoners in Medieval Britain worshiped nobility and title without question, for the sake only of a meaningless title: "... and the best of English commoners was still content to see his inferiors impudently continuing to hold a number of positions, such as lordships and the throne, to which the grotesque laws of his country did not allow him to aspire ; in fact, he was even able to persuade himself that he was proud of it.

* Mark Twain's " A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court " Chapter 31, paragraph 4 "... and my first wife was a Free Will Baptist ..."

This derives from Jackson's consideration on the case in a letter to John Coffee, "... the decision of the Supreme Court has fell still born, and they find that they cannot coerce Georgia to yield to its mandate ," ( that is, the Court's opinion was moot because it had no power to enforce its edict ).

In the case of Gencor Ltd v. Commission ECR II-753 the EU Court of First Instance wrote merger control is there "... to avoid the establishment of market structures which may create or strengthen a dominant position and not need to control directly possible abuses of dominant positions.

According to the 1866 Khoja Case ( also known as the " Aga Khan Case "), presided over by Justice Sir Joseph Arnould in the High Court of Bombay, and where the Aga Khan III ( grandfather of Aga Khan IV and the 48th Imam ) served as defendant, the Imam was described as "... an incarnation of God ..." to his community of followers.

The deal soon collapsed, however, with Court resigning and Bishop declaring that the arrangement wasn't bizarre, but "... innovative, different.

The Court stated: "... while petitioner's religious beliefs are substantially burdened by payment of taxes that fund military expenditures, the Supreme Court has established that uniform, mandatory participation in the Federal income tax system, irrespective of religious belief, is a compelling governmental interest.

Nevertheless, the defense was still denied access to those documents for two more years, until the time of the final appeal to the California Supreme Court which "... threw out the 12 perjury convictions and set aside the remaining conspiracy charge, pending a hearing on Hedgecock's claim for a new trial, which was based on allegations of jury tampering.

This principle is enshrined in the Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution, which provides that "... no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

In affirming the dismissal, the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit held that Hendel's claims were time-barred under the discovery rule because "... the defendants made representations which any reasonable person would recognize as being contrary to common human experience and, indeed, to the laws of physics.

" In United States of America v. Philip Morris et al., the District Court for the District of Columbia found that the tobacco industry "... recognized from the mid-1970s forward that the health effects of passive smoking posed a profound threat to industry viability and cigarette profits ," and that the industry responded with " efforts to undermine and discredit the scientific consensus that ETS causes disease.

" The U. S. District Court, in U. S. A. v. Philip Morris et al., found that "... despite their internal acknowledgment of the hazards of secondhand smoke, Defendants have fraudulently denied that ETS causes disease.

In Rappaport ’ s opinion, "... the Court ’ s approach to cancellation authority has no basis in text, structure and purpose, or precedent.

" The Court also noted that "... it is nothing less than sheer torture of the English language to suggest that a careful exploration of the outer surfaces of a person's clothing all over his or her body in an attempt to find weapons is not a ' search.

" The Court ruled that it "... cannot however uphold the submission of the Islamic Republic of Iran that those actions constitute a breach of the obligations of the United States of America under Article X, paragraph 1, of that Treaty, regarding freedom of commerce between the territories of the parties, and that, accordingly, the claim of the Islamic Republic of Iran for reparation also cannot be upheld ;"