By making inroads in the name of law enforcement into the protection which Congress has afforded to the marriage relationship, the Court today continues in the path charted by the recent decision in Wyatt v. United States, 362 U.S. 525, where the Court held that, under the circumstances of that case, a wife could be compelled to testify against her husband over her objection.

The Court held that federal jurisdiction should not be exercised lest the domestic policy of the state be obstructed ; ;

The Court held that Congress had intended the federal judiciary to `` fashion '' an appropriate law of labor-management contracts.

However, the Federal Court held that since the State had accepted the provisions of the Wagner-Peyser Act into its own Code, and presumably therefore also the regulations, it was now a State matter.

The High Court held that the company must apply its percentage allowance to the value of the raw materials removed from the ground, not to the revenue from finished products.

The Supreme Court of Virginia has stated that '" This Court has repeatedly held that the effect of an appeal to circuit court is to " annul the judgment of the inferior tribunal as completely as if there had been no previous trial.

However, it was held by the Supreme Court that an affidavit can be used as an evidence only if the Court so orders for sufficient reasons.

The Act overturns a 1999 U. S. Supreme Court case that held that an employee was not disabled if the impairment could be corrected by mitigating measures ; it specifically provides that such impairment must be determined without considering such ameliorative measures.

The Supreme Court held that for the plea to be accepted, the defendant must have been advised by a competent lawyer who was able to inform the individual that his best decision in the case would be to enter a guilty plea.

As evidence existed that could have supported Alford's conviction, the Supreme Court held that his guilty plea was allowable while the defendant himself still maintained that he was not guilty.

" In the 1999 South Carolina Supreme Court case State v. Gaines, the Court held that Alford guilty pleas were to be held valid in the absence of a specific on-the-record ruling that the pleas were voluntary – provided that the sentencing judge acted appropriately in accordance with the rules for acceptance of a plea made voluntarily by the defendant.

The Court held that a ruling that the plea was entered into voluntarily is implied by the act of sentencing.

In the 2006 case before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Ballard v. Burton, Judge Carl E. Stewart writing for the Court held that an Alford guilty plea is a " variation of an ordinary guilty plea ".

The Supreme Court of the United States held in its landmark case, McGowan v. Maryland ( 1961 ), that Maryland's blue laws violated neither the Free Exercise Clause nor the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The school appealed the IRS decision all the way to the U. S. Supreme Court, arguing that the University met all other criteria for tax-exempt status and that the school's racial discrimination was based on sincerely held religious beliefs, that " God intended segregation of the races and that the Scriptures forbid interracial marriage.

" The university was not challenged about the origin of its interracial dating policy, and the District Court accepted " on the basis of a full evidentiary record " BJU's argument that the rule was a sincerely held religious conviction, a finding affirmed by all subsequent courts.

As another example, the Supreme Court of the United States in 1877, held that a Michigan statute that established rules for solemnization of marriages did not abolish pre-existing common-law marriage, because the statute did not affirmatively require statutory solemnization and was silent as to preexisting common law.

In 1938, the U. S. Supreme Court in Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins 304 U. S. 64, 78 ( 1938 ), overruled earlier precedent, and held " There is no federal general common law ," thus confining the federal courts to act only as interpreters of law originating elsewhere.

This seems like an attitude favoring a sort of totalitarian bureaucracy which, under a President of the same stamp, would try to coerce an uncooperative Congress or Supreme Court.

But in any event, I submit that the power to depose belongs to Congress, not to this Court.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court, like Congress, showed misgivings concerning this aspect of government by injunction.

`` By one fell swoop the Court now finds that Congress indulged in needless legislation in the acts of 1910, 1913, 1925, 1934 and 1937.

By these measures, Congress, so the Court ( in effect ) now decides, gave not only needless but inadequate relief, since it now appears that the federal courts have inherent power to sterilize the Act of 1875 against all proceedings challenging local regulation ''.

This was " Entered according to act of Congress, in the year 1835, by C. Bradlee, in the clerk's office of the District Court of Massachusetts ", according to the Newberry Library, which also says, " The theme is that used by Mozart for his piano variations, Ah, vous dirai-je, maman.

In the United States, the power of the federal judiciary to review and invalidate unconstitutional acts of the federal executive branch is stated in the constitution, Article III sections 1 and 2: " The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

CUNY graduates include 12 Nobel laureates, a U. S. Secretary of State, a Supreme Court Justice, several mayors, members of Congress, state legislators, scientists and artists.

* 1964 – American Civil Rights Movement: Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States – The United States Supreme Court rules that the U. S. Congress can use the Constitution's Commerce Clause power to fight discrimination.

A bare majority of Congress, acting in a special session called by former President Lucio Gutiérrez in December, 2004, ousted 27 of the 31 justices and replaced them with new members chosen by Congress, notwithstanding the lack of any provisions permitting impeachment of Supreme Court justices by Congress and the specific provisions giving the Court the power to select new members.

Earlier, in November 2004, Congress replaced the majority of judges on the country's Electoral Court and Constitutional Court by a similar process.

It includes the Presidents of the National Congress and the Supreme Court of Justice ; the ministers in charge of National Defence, Government and Police, Foreign Affairs, and Economy and Finance ; the Chief of the Joint Command, and the Chiefs of the three branches of the Armed Forces.

Congress has enacted section 1912 of title 28 of the United States Code providing that in the United States Supreme Court and in the various courts of appeals where litigation by the losing party has caused damage to the prevailing party, the court may impose a requirement that the losing party pay the prevailing party for those damages.

From 1938 until 1995, the U. S. Supreme Court did not invalidate any federal statute as exceeding Congress ' power under the Commerce Clause.

On May 25, 1993, Serrano illegally dissolved Congress and the Supreme Court and tried to restrict civil freedoms, allegedly to fight corruption.

De León was not a member of any political party ; lacking a political base but with strong popular support, he launched an ambitious anticorruption campaign to " purify " Congress and the Supreme Court, demanding the resignations of all members of the two bodies.

Indeed, as already noted, the Court proceeded on the assumption that the executives involved in the dealings between Du Pont and General Motors acted `` honorably and fairly '' and exercised their business judgment only to serve what they deemed the best interests of their own companies.

In October 1985, the California Supreme Court rejected Rosenthal's appeal of the multimillion-dollar judgment against him for legal malpractice, and upheld conclusions of a trial court and a Court of Appeal that Rosenthal acted improperly.

The cases were consolidated, and in 1973 the U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that the EPA had acted properly in banning DDT.

It acted as the Parliamentary Court, had the right to control ' citizens ' books ', and had similar legislative rights as did the Chamber of Deputies.

* Three justices ( Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas ) argued that the Florida Supreme Court had acted contrary to the intent of the Florida legislature.

In its judgment summary the Appeals Court said, " The trial court acted without jurisdiction in entering an injunction against the Election Commission.

The rest of the Supreme Court had nothing to do with Merryman, and the other two justices from the South, John Catron and James Moore Wayne, acted as Unionists ; for instance, Catron's charge to a Saint Louis grand jury, saying that armed resistance to the federal government was treason, was quoted in the New York Tribune of July 14, 1861.

The Court of Session acted as the Teind Court.

It formerly acted as the Supreme Administrative Court prior to the establishment of the Administrative Courts in 1999.

Each city could have its own lesser Sanhedrin of 23 judges, but there could be only one Great Sanhedrin of 71, which among other roles acted as the Supreme Court, taking appeals from cases decided by lesser courts.

Henrietta Maria enjoys the last-named work so much that she has it brought to London and acted at Hampton Court by her own company, Queen Henrietta's Men.

)-Beggars ' Bush acted at Court

* The Children of Paul's perform at Court twice in the first week of January ; one of the plays they acted may have been John Lyly's Midas.

* Tottenham Court ( acted 1633, printed 1638 ), a comedy set in a holiday resort for London tradesmen ;

On 11 July 2006, in a judgment by the European Court of Justice on Case C-432 / 04 ( Commission of the European Communities versus Édith Cresson ), the Court declared that Édith Cresson acted in breach of her obligations as a European commissioner.

In May 2008, the skate park development was stopped by the Supreme Court of Victoria, claiming that the council had acted inappropriately.

On June 1, 2007, the California Supreme Court rejected the Court of Appeal's decision, ruling that the correct standard of implied malice was not simply an awareness of the risk of serious bodily harm, but requires proof that a defendant acted with conscious disregard of the danger to human life.

On August 23, 2010, the First District Court of Appeal in San Francisco ruled 3-0 that Marjorie Knoller acted with a conscious disregard for human life when her Presa Canario escaped and killed Diane Whipple in 2001.