Paul A. Freund is known for his writings on what supreme law of the United States of America?
4cafd0e1b67c94d9b0be8d0148131e14
Paul A. Freund Paul A. Freund (February 16, 1908—February 5, 1992) was an American jurist and law professor. He taught most of his life at Harvard Law School and is known for his writings on the United States Constitution and the Supreme Court of the United States.
fc6018bbf384517e5a8ac969a797fcee
United States Constitution The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the United States of America. The Constitution, originally comprising seven articles, delineates the national frame of government. Its first three articles entrench the doctrine of the separation of powers, whereby the federal government is divided into three branches: the legislative, consisting of the bicameral Congress; the executive, consisting of the President; and the judicial, consisting of the Supreme Court and other federal courts. Articles Four, Five and Six entrench concepts of federalism, describing the rights and responsibilities of state governments and of the states in relationship to the federal government. Article Seven establishes the procedure subsequently used by the thirteen States to ratify it.
e3d35cfcf9f64b0e7a77a67e19370c4b
Cleveland v. United States Cleveland v. United States is the name for two United States Supreme Court cases.
41dec039ea1369e628cb996de9f0cc38
Kinsella v. Krueger Kinsella v. Krueger, 351 U.S. 470 (1956) and 354 U.S. 1 (1957) , was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that the Constitution supersedes international treaties ratified by the United States Senate. According to the decision, the Court recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty, although the case itself was with regard to an executive agreement, not a "treaty" in the U.S. legal sense, and the agreement itself has never been ruled unconstitutional.
32aaf42292ecabd6b98e8d0d81c0b665
Case law Case law is the set of past rulings by judges and similar tribunals, and that meet their respective jurisdictions' rules for formality to be cited as precedent. These interpretations are distinguished from statutory law which are the statutes and codes enacted by legislative bodies; regulatory law which are regulations established by executive branch agencies based on statutes. The term "case law" is applied to any set of previous rulings by an adjudicatory tribunal that guides future rulings, for example, "patent office case law".
b95818e9f9c3f0736f877aafb7425f86
Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc. Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc., 514 U.S. 211 (1995), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that Congress may not retroactively require federal courts to reopen final judgments. Writing for the Court, Justice Scalia asserted that such action amounted to an unauthorized encroachment by Congress upon the powers of the judiciary and therefore violated the constitutional principle of separation of powers.
dea630029ffa6b2a3865cdae315299de
Paul L. Friedman Paul L. Friedman (born February 20, 1944) is a Senior United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. He serves as Secretary of the American Law Institute.
8e7f4a159239c9c75ddd51629c293410
Ashwander rules The Ashwander rules, articulated by Justice Louis D. Brandeis, are a set of principles used by the United States Supreme Court for avoiding constitutional rulings.
dc63c5bd0ac00bfb1c0067bb058fdedf
John E. Freund John Ernst Freund (August 6, 1921 – 2004) was a prominent author of university level textbooks on statistics. He taught for many years at Arizona State University and had previously studied at the University of London, the University of California at Los Angeles, Columbia University, and the University of Pittsburgh.
42c31e0c59576854e269f33dddf0e8bf
United States v. Cors United States v. Cors, , was a United States Supreme Court case interpreting the Merchant Marine Act of 1936 and the Takings clause of the 5th amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
362ffc833e4c9691b2de2c16e9f4977e
History of the Supreme Court of the United States The following is a history of the Supreme Court of the United States, organized by Chief Justice. The Supreme Court of the United States is the only court specifically established by the Constitution of the United States, implemented in 1789; under the Judiciary Act of 1789, the Court was to be composed of six members—though the number of justices has been nine for almost all of its history, this number is set by Congress, not the Constitution. The court convened for the first time on February 2, 1790.
7bcd034548aa39cf3f3c54e157366a27
Gibbons v. Ogden Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. 1 (1824), was a landmark decision in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the power to regulate interstate commerce, granted to Congress by the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, encompassed the power to regulate navigation. The case was argued by some of America's most admired and capable attorneys at the time. Exiled Irish patriot Thomas Addis Emmet and Thomas J. Oakley argued for Ogden, while U.S. Attorney General William Wirt and Daniel Webster argued for Gibbons.
a1116b3a4a1f45000dd2f21da42b8c3c
Downes v. Bidwell Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901) , was a case in which the US Supreme Court decided whether US territories were subject to the provisions and protections of the US Constitution. This issue is sometimes stated as whether the Constitution follows the flag. The resulting decision narrowly held that the Constitution did not necessarily apply to territories. Instead, the US Congress had jurisdiction to create law within territories in certain circumstances, particularly in those dealing with revenue, which would not be allowed by the Constitution for proper states within the Union. It has become known as one of the "Insular Cases".
67309d58412e634b16d8252859f9e8ef
John Paul Frank John Paul Frank (November 10, 1917—September 7, 2002) was an American lawyer and scholar involved in landmark civil rights, school desegregation, and criminal procedure cases before the United States Supreme Court.
3b336bced95b0a24f3c3d317cd0b45fe
Constitution of West Virginia The Constitution of the State of West Virginia is the supreme law of the U.S. State of West Virginia. It expresses the rights of the State's citizens and provides the framework for the organization of law and government. In its first Article, the clause states that ""The state of West Virginia is, and shall remain, one of the United States of America. The constitution of the United States of America, and the laws and treaties made in pursuance thereof, shall be the supreme law of the land."" West Virginia is governed under its second and current Constitution which dates from 1872. In November 1960 a Preamble was added. The document includes fourteen articles and several amendments.
e9f461176d89ebbd021f5ad3558f375b
Federal common law Federal common law is a term of United States law used to describe common law that is developed by the federal courts, instead of by the courts of the various states. The United States is the only country to combine the creation of common law doctrines with a complete federalism, wherein the national supreme court has virtually no power to review state court decisions to determine whether the state courts have followed state laws. The High Court of Australia is sometimes said to have federal common law, but because all state and territorial courts are directly appealable to the High Court, this is indistinguishable from a general common law. In contrast, the United States Supreme Court has effectively barred the creation of federal common law in areas traditionally under the authority of state courts. Nevertheless, there are several areas where federal common law continues to govern.
a8f1f88153bf9a1181efe6683bc2bdd4
Incorporation of the Bill of Rights Incorporation, in U.S. law, is the process by which American courts have applied portions of the U.S. Bill of Rights to the states. When it was first ratified, the Bill of Rights only protected the rights it enumerated from federal infringement, allowing states and local governments to abridge them. However, beginning in 1897 with "Chicago, Burlington and Quincy Railroad v. City of Chicago", various portions have been held to be incorporated against state and local government through the Fourteenth Amendment.
d764344b090561766b5e21f96fa704af
Feres v. United States Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950), combined three pending federal cases for a hearing in certiorari in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the United States is not liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries to members of the armed forces sustained while on active duty and not on furlough and resulting from the negligence of others in the armed forces. The opinion is an extension of the English common-law concept of sovereign immunity.
7709507cc4ecac6fd455f7ec820fb1e0
Phi Alpha Delta Phi Alpha Delta (ΦΑΔ or PAD) is the largest co-ed professional law fraternity in the United States. Phi Alpha Delta has members who are university students, law school students, lawyers, judges, and politicians. It was founded in 1902 and today has over 300,000 initiated members. Approximately one out of six attorneys in the United States is a member of PAD. Five of the sitting Justices of the United States Supreme Court are members of PAD. From 1964 to 1968, Tom C. Clark, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, served as Supreme Vice Justice of the Fraternity. Additionally, one of five of all Federal judges and three of ten of all State judges are PAD members. Six U.S. Presidents have likewise been members of PAD.
c1a5ab8450c26e3f365bf86b34733681
Chase Court The Chase Court refers to the Supreme Court of the United States from 1864 to 1873, when Salmon P. Chase served as the sixth Chief Justice of the United States. Chase succeeded Roger Taney as Chief Justice after the latter's death. Chase served as Chief Justice until his death, at which point Morrison Waite was nominated and confirmed as Chase's successor. The Chase Court presided over the end of the Civil War and much of the Reconstruction Era. During the Chase Court, Congress passed the Habeas Corpus Act 1867, giving the court the ability to issue writs of habeas corpus for defendants tried by state courts. The Chase Court interpreted the Fourteenth Amendent for the first time, and its narrow reading of the Amendment would be adopted by subsequent courts.
e26f8f375ef9c64941fbbc64c88e0566
United States Code The Code of Laws of the United States of America (variously abbreviated to Code of Laws of the United States, United States Code, U.S. Code, or U.S.C.) is the official compilation and codification of the general and permanent federal statutes of the United States. It contains 52 titles (Titles 1-54, except Title 53 is reserved and Title 34 was repealed). The main edition is published every six years by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel of the House of Representatives, and cumulative supplements are published annually. The official version of those laws not codified in the United States Code can be found in United States Statutes at Large.
61cb59557958c6bf995a5f0526224435
Overbreadth doctrine In American jurisprudence, the overbreadth doctrine is primarily concerned with facial challenges to laws under the First Amendment. American courts have recognized several exceptions to the speech protected by the First Amendment (for example, obscenity, fighting words, and libel or defamation), and states therefore have some latitude to regulate unprotected speech. A statute doing so is overly broad (hence, overbreadth) if, in proscribing "unprotected" speech, it also proscribes "protected" speech. Because an overly broad law may deter constitutionally protected speech, the overbreadth doctrine allows a party to whom the law may constitutionally be applied to challenge the statute on the ground that it violates the First Amendment rights of others. See, e.g., "Board of Trustees of State Univ. of N.Y. v. Fox", 492 U.S. 469, 483 (1989), and "R. A. V. v. City of St. Paul", 505 U.S. 377 (1992). Overbreadth is closely related to vagueness; if a prohibition is expressed in a way that is too unclear for a person to reasonably know whether or not their conduct falls within the law, then to avoid the risk of legal consequences they often stay far away from anything that could possibly fit the uncertain wording of the law. The law's effects are thereby far broader than intended or than the U.S. Constitution permits, and hence the law is overbroad.