Search for: "Ex parte McCardle"
Results 1 - 20
of 25
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Aug 2023, 6:34 pm
Ex parte McCardle and Congress’s Power over the Court’s Appellate Jurisdiction; The Supreme Court’s 1869 ruling allowing Congress to take away its jurisdiction over a pending case is quite a story in its own right, and has important separation-of-powers implications for today. [read post]
1 Dec 2009, 1:02 am
Here is the abstract: This essay examines the costs of judicial intervention in wartime policy through the lens of three Civil War cases - Ex parte Merryman, Ex parte Milligan, and Ex parte McCardle. [read post]
17 Jan 2007, 2:09 pm
The 90-minute afternoon program will will focus on the impeachment and not-guilty verdict in 1805 for Associate Justice Samuel Chase, the Court's 1868 decision in Ex parte McCardle on jurisdiction-stripping legislation, and President Franklin Roosevelt's "Court-packing" plan in 1937. [read post]
15 Aug 2023, 7:45 am
Here’s the Tuesday morning read: Biden Administration Urges Justices to Hear Cases on Social Media Laws (Adam Liptak, The New York Times) Ex parte McCardle and Congress’s Power over the Court’s Appellate Jurisdiction (Steve Vladeck, One First) Biden administration urges colleges to pursue diversity after Supreme Court ruling (Nate Raymond & Jarrett Renshaw, Reuters) Federal judges question Alabama’s new congressional map, lack of 2nd… [read post]
27 Jun 2019, 5:52 pm
How about Ex Parte McCardle? [read post]
23 Apr 2022, 1:04 pm
The only time that history makes an appearance in a standard law school course is Ex Parte McCardle, and even for that discussion I'm not sure there's much depth. [read post]
13 Aug 2021, 9:30 pm
Madison (1803), Ex parte McCardle (1869), and City of Boerne v. [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 12:09 pm
So was Ex Parte McCardle. [read post]
12 Aug 2024, 4:00 am
On a broad reading of Ex Parte McCardle, Congress's power to strip appellate jurisdiction from SCOTUS is virtually unlimited (save for stripping statutes that violate some other constitutional provision, such as a law stripping jurisdiction in cases involving all but white plaintiffs, for example, which would violate the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment's due process clause).Yet there is a robust literature challenging the broad reading of… [read post]
3 Apr 2020, 8:32 am
Nolan, "Ex Parte Milligan: A Curb of Executive and Military Power. [read post]
23 Jun 2007, 12:20 am
Likewise, the most disturbing decision from the era is Ex Parte McCardle, which permitted Congress to withdraw habeas jurisdiction over a pending case---but the consensus reading of McCardle makes its result turn on the availability of other avenues of relief. [read post]
31 Mar 2012, 6:17 am
Stripped the Court of jurisdiction to hear Ex Parte McCardle. 5. [read post]
11 Jun 2019, 6:30 am
The majority relied in part on Ex parte McCardle (1868), which dismissed a case after oral argument but before judgment on the ground that Congress had repealed the federal law granting jurisdiction. [read post]
30 Apr 2011, 5:54 am
” Ex parte McCardle, 74 U.S. 506, 514 (1868). [read post]
7 May 2010, 10:29 am
Some examples include Ex Parte McCardle (the Court let its jurisdiction be stripped in a case challenging the validity of military Reconstruction), The Gold Clause Cases (the Court held that the New Deal Congress could not deny gold repayment on government bonds but held that the bond-holder had no remedy), and Stuart v. [read post]
6 Mar 2018, 9:01 pm
He cited the 1868 ruling in Ex Parte McCardle. [read post]
23 Mar 2010, 5:19 pm
Laird, Ex Parte McCardle, The Gold Clause Cases, or Heart of Atlanta Motel? [read post]
2 Sep 2010, 5:11 pm
Ex Parte McCardle is another, as the Court could have issued an opinion on the merits in that case before the jurisdiction-stripping statute took effect but chose not to. [read post]
24 Jun 2021, 6:30 am
The most valuable parts of the Lash collection are his materials on the ratification debates, which he had to assemble state by state. [read post]
7 Nov 2017, 5:15 pm
” The problem with that argument, though, is that it runs head-on into the Supreme Court’s long-standing rule (based on the 1869 decision in Ex parte McCardle) that Congress has power to “strip” the federal courts of jurisdiction. [read post]
