Constitutional Law. Power of the Judiciary. Federal Court Enjoining State Attorney-General from Enforcing a State Statute

1908 ◽  
Vol 21 (7) ◽  
pp. 540
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Federal Court

scholarly journals When is a Whale Sanctuary Not a Whale Sanctuary? Japanese Whaling in Australian Antarctic Maritime Zones

2005 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 757 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Mossop
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
Exclusive Economic Zone ◽  
Environment Protection ◽  
Australian Government ◽  
Japanese Company ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
Territorial Claim ◽  
Economic Zone

This article concerns the case of Humane Society International v Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha Ltd, in which the Humane Society, a non-governmental organisation, attempted to sue a Japanese company conducting whaling in the Southern Ocean in an area claimed as an exclusive economic zone by Australia.  The Humane Society failed to convince the Federal Court to allow it to serve proceedings on the Japanese company outside Australia, after the judge agreed with the arguments provided by the Australian Attorney-General. These submissions included the possibility of an embarrassing international incident that could arise if a Japanese company were to be served with proceedings enforcing a law that Japan considers to be inconsistent with the freedom of navigation on the high seas. Underpinning the whole case was the issue of sovereignty over Antarctica, which Australia and other countries have disputed for many decades. The author evaluates Australia’s claim to an exclusive economic zone around its Antarctic territorial claim, and its use of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 to declare a whale sanctuary in that part of the world. The author suggests that it might be possible for the Australian courts to read the whale sanctuary legislation in line with international law, potentially relying on the New Zealand Sellers case, to exclude overseas companies from the effects of the legislation. However, the author concludes it would not be desirable for the Australian Government to rely on such a possibility to avoid potential international repercussions from its domestic legislation.

Constitutional Law in 1949–1950

1951 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 86-109
Author(s):  
Robert J. Harris
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
The United States ◽  
Circuit Court ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
The Supreme Court

There were two changes in the personnel of the Supreme Court during the 1949 term. Attorney General Tom C. Clark was sworn in as an Associate Justice to succeed the late Justice Frank Murphy on August 24, 1949, after his nomination by President Truman had been approved on August 19 by a vote of 73 to 8. Judge Sherman Minton of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals was nominated to be an Associate Justice on September 15, 1949, to succeed Justice Wiley Rutledge. His nomination was approved by the Senate on October 4 by a vote of 48 to 16, and he was sworn in on October 12. During much of the term Justice Douglas was absent as the result of an accident incurred during the preceding summer recess. The loss of Justices Murphy and Rutledge greatly weakened the liberal alignment of the Court and very positively influenced the decision of a number of doubtful cases contrary to precedents of a recent date.

scholarly journals The Constitution Act, 1982: the Foreseen and Unforeseen

2011 ◽  
Vol 16 (1, 2 & 3) ◽  
pp. 2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hon. Barry L. Strayer
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Job Training ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Constitutional Reform ◽  
On The Job Training ◽  
Attorneys General ◽  
The University

I started preparations for my first constitu- tional conference in an office overlooking Was- cana Lake nearly forty-seven years ago. I was a young lawyer in the Department of the Attor- ney General of Saskatchewan. Prime Minister Diefenbaker had announced that there would be a Conference of Attorneys-General in early October 1960, chaired by Justice Minister Ful- ton, to seek agreement on “Repatriation of the Constitution.” As I expressed interest in the conference to the Attorney General, and had recently taught constitutional law for a year at the University of Saskatchewan, I was made the secretary of the Saskatchewan delegation. This involved most of the work of research and writ- ing position papers and speeches. But it also in- volved making hotel and travel reservations for which I claimed no particular skill! Of course, after four such meetings in 1960 and 1961 we reached no agreement on repatriation, but it gave me on the job training in constitutional reform.

Medicaid Expansion during the Trump Presidency: The Role of Executive Waivers, State Ballot Measures, and Attorney General Lawsuits in Shaping Intergovernmental Relations

2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 437-464 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lilliard E Richardson
Keyword(s):  
Intergovernmental Relations ◽  
Personal Responsibility ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
Work Requirements ◽  
Ballot Measures ◽  
Medicaid Policy ◽  
Attorneys General ◽  
Policy Adjustments

Abstract This article assesses developments in the first two years of the Trump presidency regarding implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), with a focus on Medicaid policy. Trump administration officials relied on executive actions to chip away at various elements of the ACA and encouraged and granted state requests for waivers allowing work-requirements and other personal-responsibility rules for Medicaid beneficiaries. Governors and state attorneys general were actively involved in lawsuits that led to several federal court rulings blocking implementation of Medicaid work requirements as well as a ruling that re-opened the legitimacy of the entire ACA. Citizens and interest groups had a major impact at the ballot box by approving several ballot measures that expanded Medicaid in states where expansion was opposed by elected officials. These developments demonstrate how policy adjustments and disputes are worked out in the U.S. federal system in a polarized era, with Congress essentially a bystander and other institutions and actors coming to the fore and resulting in variable speed federalism characterized by different partisan trajectories of state implementation of national policies.

Litigating the Indiana Photo-ID Law: Lessons in Judicial Dissonance and Abdication

2009 ◽  
Vol 42 (01) ◽  
pp. 97-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
William R. Groth
Keyword(s):  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Political Development ◽  
Democratic Party ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Federal District ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
District Court ◽  
Party Line ◽  
Political Exile ◽  
First Time

Following the 2004 elections Republicans assumed ascendancy in Indiana, capturing the governorship for the first time in 16 years, retaining control of the Senate and regaining control of the Indiana House of Representatives after eight years in political exile. This political development set the stage for the passage in April 2005 of the Indiana photo-ID law, also known as Senate Enrolled Act 483 (SEA), on a straight party-line vote. Two days after SEA 483 was signed into law by governor Mitch Daniels the Indiana Democratic Party (IDP) filed suit in federal district court in Indianapolis (IDP v. Rokita2006). The case was assigned in a blind draw to U.S. district judge Sarah Evans Barker, an appointee of President Reagan and a former U.S. attorney. The same day the Indiana chapter of the ACLU filed an action in Marion Superior Court,Crawford v. Marion County Election Board. The Indiana attorney general intervened in both cases to defend the law's constitutionality and removedCrawfordto federal court, where it was immediately consolidated withRokita.

Constitutional Law in 1941–1942: The Constitutional Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States in the October Term, 1941

1943 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-289
Author(s):  
Robert E. Cushman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
South Carolina ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
The United States ◽  
Chief Justice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Decisions

The vacancies on the Supreme Court caused by the retirement of Mr. Justice McReynolds and Chief Justice Hughes were filled by President Roosevelt during the summer of 1941. When the Court convened in October, Mr. Justice Stone, originally appointed by President Coolidge, became Chief Justice. Chief Justice White was the only other associate justice to be promoted to the Chief Justiceship. Senator James F. Byrnes of South Carolina, and Attorney General Robert H. Jackson of New York took their seats as associate justices. Thus seven justices have been placed on the Court by President Roosevelt. Any idea, however, that these Roosevelt appointees conform to any uniform pattern of thought is belied by the fact that in the 75 cases in the 1941 term turning on important questions of either constitutional law or federal statutory construction, there were dissents in 36, and 23 of these dissents were by either three or four justices. No act of Congress has been declared unconstitutional since May, 1936, when the Municipal Bankruptcy Act was held invalid. Since 1937, the Court has overruled 20 previous decisions, mentioning them by name, while it has modified or qualified a number of others.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document