United States Reports: Cases Adjudged in the Supreme Court at ... and Rules Announced at ..Banks & Bros., Law Publishers, 1999 |
From inside the book
Արդյունքներ 100–ի 1-ից 5-ը:
Էջ 27
... question in this case is whether a federal statute that permits national banks to sell insurance in small towns pre- empts a state statute that forbids them to do so . To answer this question , we must consider both ordinary pre ...
... question in this case is whether a federal statute that permits national banks to sell insurance in small towns pre- empts a state statute that forbids them to do so . To answer this question , we must consider both ordinary pre ...
Էջ 31
... question , find language in the federal statute that reveals an explicit congressional intent to pre - empt state law . E. g . , Jones v . Rath Packing Co. , 430 U. S. 519 , 525 , 530-531 ( 1977 ) . More often , explicit pre - emption ...
... question , find language in the federal statute that reveals an explicit congressional intent to pre - empt state law . E. g . , Jones v . Rath Packing Co. , 430 U. S. 519 , 525 , 530-531 ( 1977 ) . More often , explicit pre - emption ...
Էջ 44
... question : Was the Act in question passed pursuant to a constitu- tional provision granting Congress such power ? This Court has found authority to abrogate under only two constitutional provisions : the Syllabus Fourteenth Amendment ...
... question : Was the Act in question passed pursuant to a constitu- tional provision granting Congress such power ? This Court has found authority to abrogate under only two constitutional provisions : the Syllabus Fourteenth Amendment ...
Էջ 57
... question , we should interpret the Act to provide only a suit against state officials rather than a suit against the State itself . Post , at 182. But in light of the plain text of § 2710 ( d ) ( 7 ) ( B ) , we disagree with the ...
... question , we should interpret the Act to provide only a suit against state officials rather than a suit against the State itself . Post , at 182. But in light of the plain text of § 2710 ( d ) ( 7 ) ( B ) , we disagree with the ...
Էջ 58
... question here , however , we think it necessary first to define the scope of our inquiry . Petitioner suggests that one consideration weighing in favor of finding the power to abrogate here is that the Act authorizes only prospective ...
... question here , however , we think it necessary first to define the scope of our inquiry . Petitioner suggests that one consideration weighing in favor of finding the power to abrogate here is that the Act authorizes only prospective ...
Այլ խմբագրություններ - View all
United States Reports: Cases Adjudged in the Supreme Court, Հատոր 320 United States. Supreme Court Ամբողջությամբ դիտվող - 1944 |
Common terms and phrases
action Alabama Alabama Supreme Court amici curiae apply argued the cause Attorney authority award Bank BREYER Brief certiorari Circuit claim Commerce common law concluded conduct Cong Congress constitutional Corp County Court of Appeals criminal decision defendant delegation dismiss dissenting District Court doctrine election Eleventh Amendment enacted enforcement ERISA Ex parte Young Export Clause federal court Federal Rule federal-question filed Government granted Holly Farms Ibid imposed issue judge judgment of acquittal judicial jurisdiction jury JUSTICE STEVENS legislative lesser included offense limited ment motion National Office of Personnel Opinion of STEVENS Personnel Management petitioner political parties preclearance principles Procedure prohibition protection provides punitive damages question reason regulation remand requirement respondents SCALIA sentence SOUTER sovereign immunity Stat State's statute statutory sua sponte suit supra Supreme Court tion trial Twenty-first Amendment United violation Virginia voting Voting Rights Act