Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Necessary and Proper Clause, also known as the Elastic Clause, [1] is a clause in Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution: The Congress shall have Power... To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government ...
The law that Attorney General Gonzales was applying was ruled unconstitutional by lower courts on the grounds it exceeded Congress’s constitutional authority. Argued in January 2010 by Solicitor General Elena Kagan, the position of the United States was that the Necessary and Proper Clause gave Congress the power to enact the law. [9]
The petitioners did not pursue a new case after the Supreme Court remanded the case back to the trial court. [16] After the decision, the Philippine government had inventoried the remnant old growth forests and restricted logging in those areas. [17] The case is recognized in its contribution in the development of international environmental law.
This is an accepted version of this page This is the latest accepted revision, reviewed on 25 October 2024. 1819 United States Supreme Court case McCulloch v. Maryland Supreme Court of the United States Argued February 21 – March 3, 1819 Decided March 6, 1819 Full case name James McCulloch v. The State of Maryland, John James [a] Citations 17 U.S. 316 (more) 4 Wheat. 316; 4 L. Ed. 579; 1819 ...
Article I, Section 8, clause 18, known as the Necessary and Proper Clause, grants Congress the power to "make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution all Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof". [50]
Falcis III v. Civil Registrar-General, 861 Phil. 388 (2019), was a case which arose out of a petition filed by Filipino lawyer Jesus Falcis III before the Supreme Court of the Philippines. The Court promulgated its ruling on September 3, 2019.
The quo warranto petition against Maria Lourdes Sereno, filed before the Supreme Court of the Philippines, led to the landmark case Republic v. Sereno [note 1] (G. R. No. 237428), [3] [4] [5] which nullified Maria Lourdes Sereno's appointment as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines, finding that she never lawfully held the office due to a lack of integrity for failing to file ...
Classic in upholding Section 302 in federal elections under the Congressional Elections Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause, [187] and not to enforce the Equal Protection Clause as argued by Associate Justices William J. Brennan, Byron White, and Thurgood Marshall in a single opinion and William O. Douglas in a separate opinion. [188]