Tribe agreed that Congress could not tolerate such behavior by the president. “Even the Republicans in Congress who sit still as Trump gradually violates one constitutional norm after another may well rise up against outright defiance of a Supreme Court order,” he said. … [Read more...] about Trump’s Claims Of Vast Power Could Be Heading Toward A Supreme Court Showdown
Appellate court vs supreme court
He went on to say, “Thus, in the present case, the act of petitioner husband of planting an audio-video recorder without the knowledge information of respondent certainly amounts to invasion of respondent’s right to privacy. Petitioner had no right to plant such a device. Having planted the said recorder and made a recording therein, legally permissible consequences would follow in appropriate proceedings. Petitioner can be held liable for violating the respondent’s fundamental right to privacy. The question that needs to be answered by this court in the present application is from the next stage onwards that is whether the evidence so collected in violation of respondent’s fundamental right to privacy is admissible or not?” … [Read more...] about Secretly Recorded Telephonic Talk Between Wife & Friend In Breach Of Privacy Right Admissible In Family Court, Says Delhi Court
Both these cases were specific to curb trans-boundary smuggling of cattle. Arguments were on the illegal animal markets near the international border which are considered to be launch pad of illegal smuggling of cattle to Nepal and Bangladesh. The joint settlement proposal which was accepted by the Supreme Court on 13th July 2015 was formulated only in consultation with respondents in W.P. (Civil) No. 881 of 2014. Most of those respondents are states bordering to Nepal and Bangladesh. It is strange that joint proposals formulated to curb trans-boundary smuggling of cattle is used for regulating the animal markets in the country. The Supreme Court has issued no directions to take steps to prevent ban of cattle sale for slaughter. That issue was not at all considered by Court.The directions of the Apex Court were to take steps to curb trans border smuggling of cattle. It is unfortunate that such directions are misinterpreted to justify the provisions in the Rules which impose … [Read more...] about Supreme Court Orders And New Cattle Rules
The Supreme Court also provided an explanation to ensure that the federal courts properly applied this change in the standard of review. The Court explained that when a district court’s claim construction required it to review only evidence intrinsic to a patent, that is, only the patent claims and the specification, along with the prosecution history, the district court’s determination would be solely a question of law, and thus, subject to de novo review. Conversely, where a district court is forced to look beyond the patent’s intrinsic evidence and consider extrinsic evidence in constructing a patent’s claims the clear error standard must apply. Thus, for example, where a district court considers opposing testimony of experts and makes a factual finding, that determination is subject to clear error review, but the ultimate construction based upon that factual underpinning remains subject to de novo review. … [Read more...] about The Copaxone Story in the U.S. and India: U.S. Supreme Court Decision
Friedman’s language is a far cry from Kramer’s forceful advocacy. As eloquently described by commentators, Kramer challenges the Supreme Court’s usurpation of constitutional interpretive authorityvi]and seeks to “[b]ring the people back as the protagonists of American constitutional history.”[vii] Friedman, by contrast, carefully neutralizes his use of “should” and “ought” with sharply conditioned language: “To say that the Supreme Court follows popular opinion,” he writes, “or even that it should, is hardly to say that the Court ought to be responsive to every passing fancy . . . of the American people.”[viii] But in context, it seems that he means only that the Court should divine the enduring will of The People rather than follow popular whim.[ix] He quickly follows his disclaimer with ringing endorsements from Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt of judges who will “follow” the … [Read more...] about The People or the Court Who Reigns Supreme, How, and Why?