Search for: "Ex Parte McCardle" Results 1 - 20 of 22
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Aug 2023, 9:01 pm by Michael C. Dorf
In Ex Parte McCardle, the Court, which was sympathetic to the petitioner, nonetheless dismissed the case on the ground that Congress had validly exercised its Exceptions Clause power.McCardle was and remains controversial, as it seemingly permits Congress to use its power under the Exceptions Clause to steer the substantive outcomes of Supreme Court cases. [read post]
15 Aug 2023, 7:45 am by SCOTUSblog
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]
14 Aug 2023, 6:34 pm by Howard Bashman
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]
23 Apr 2022, 1:04 pm by Gerard N. Magliocca
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 by ernst
Madison (1803), Ex parte McCardle (1869), and City of Boerne v. [read post]
24 Jun 2021, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
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]
11 Jun 2019, 6:30 am by Mark Graber
  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parte McCardle (1868), which dismissed a case after oral argument but before judgment on the ground that Congress had repealed the federal law granting jurisdiction.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]
6 Mar 2018, 9:01 pm by Michael C. Dorf
He cited  the 1868 ruling in Ex Parte McCardle. [read post]
7 Nov 2017, 5:15 pm by Ronald Mann
” 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]
31 Mar 2012, 6:17 am by Gerard Magliocca
 Stripped the Court of jurisdiction to hear Ex Parte McCardle. 5. [read post]
30 Apr 2011, 5:54 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Ex parte McCardle, 74 U.S. 506, 514 (1868). [read post]
2 Sep 2010, 5:11 pm by Gerard Magliocca
 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]
20 Jul 2010, 5:38 am by Gerard Magliocca
Madison.[13] The second concerns the Reconstruction Acts, which put the South under military rule following the Civil War and were behind the great jurisdiction-stripping case of Ex Parte McCardle.[14] And the third addresses two laws passed during Franklin D. [read post]
7 May 2010, 10:29 am by Gerard Magliocca
 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]
23 Mar 2010, 5:19 pm by Gerard Magliocca
Laird, Ex Parte McCardle, The Gold Clause Cases, or Heart of Atlanta Motel? [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]
13 Sep 2007, 12:09 pm
Apr.18, 2007) (quoting Ex parte McCardle, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 506, 514, 19 L.Ed. 264 (1868)) ("Without [subject matter] jurisdiction the court cannot proceed at all in any cause. [read post]