Crosswords1 min ago
Why Do Some Crimes Fall Under The Remit Of Federal Courts In The Usa
?
Answers
1 to 8 of 8
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sandyRoe. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
because they have two legal systems
state and fed
so it is possible to be acquitted in state law ( think race ) and be indicted in the Federal system on the same facts
There are ( must be) fed only crimes - impeaching the pres springs to mind for one never having gone near stateside law
being Fed is generally bigger and better - and i think the Fed judges are appointed and not elected
state and fed
so it is possible to be acquitted in state law ( think race ) and be indicted in the Federal system on the same facts
There are ( must be) fed only crimes - impeaching the pres springs to mind for one never having gone near stateside law
being Fed is generally bigger and better - and i think the Fed judges are appointed and not elected
I think the immigration and wall cases were in the Fed court
the immigration case judgements have some court ( juridical ) agonising about 'Parens patriae' - whether they have general jurisdiction and then more agonising about the instant case
( such as the dead kid in immigration which apparently never occurs) only in America
the immigration case judgements have some court ( juridical ) agonising about 'Parens patriae' - whether they have general jurisdiction and then more agonising about the instant case
( such as the dead kid in immigration which apparently never occurs) only in America
Because that's what a federal system is, Sandy. (Welcome back, by the way - where have you been hiding?) The State makes laws binding on all citizens, but the states their own laws in areasoutside the national jurisdiction.
A recent and controversial example is abortion "rights" (as in Roe v Wade. See what I've done there as Bradley Walsh might say?). Some States impose a maximum time within pregnancy innancy which abortion is illegal. More "progressive States grant the right to an abortion at any point within pregnancy.
A recent and controversial example is abortion "rights" (as in Roe v Wade. See what I've done there as Bradley Walsh might say?). Some States impose a maximum time within pregnancy innancy which abortion is illegal. More "progressive States grant the right to an abortion at any point within pregnancy.
Congratulations, also, Sandy, for the Republic's entry into the modern liberal world by its legalisation of abortion and voting for its first taoiseach. I understand you in the North are about to enter this modern world, although under some (let's not use the word "coeercion") persuasion.
Brave New World, what, Sandy? Mortals? Calibans? Who knows, eh?
Brave New World, what, Sandy? Mortals? Calibans? Who knows, eh?
// A recent and controversial example is abortion "rights" (as in Roe v Wade. See what I've done there as Bradley Walsh might say?).//
example of what? the OP was about federal crime
and Roe v Wade is about a supreme case court allowing abortion under certain circumstances determined by the respective states
as for the first gay tea-shack in Ireland
https:/
Leo Varadkar as far as I know, has nothing at all to do with Federal crimes or not in the USA
that last bit was a littel - irish if you dont mind me saying
example of what? the OP was about federal crime
and Roe v Wade is about a supreme case court allowing abortion under certain circumstances determined by the respective states
as for the first gay tea-shack in Ireland
https:/
Leo Varadkar as far as I know, has nothing at all to do with Federal crimes or not in the USA
that last bit was a littel - irish if you dont mind me saying
I say somewhere the parens patriae never comes up in English Law
here is a late spotting:
https:/
and here
It is the duty of the King, as parens patriae, to protect property devoted to charitable uses; (Attorney General v Brown (1818) 1 Swans 265, 291; 36 ER 384, 394-395) Ld ELdon no less
oh lordy lordy !
( can a court tell a charitable officer how to behave if there is no breach of fiduciary duty?)
here is a late spotting:
https:/
and here
It is the duty of the King, as parens patriae, to protect property devoted to charitable uses; (Attorney General v Brown (1818) 1 Swans 265, 291; 36 ER 384, 394-395) Ld ELdon no less
oh lordy lordy !
( can a court tell a charitable officer how to behave if there is no breach of fiduciary duty?)
1 to 8 of 8
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.