Quotes About Judicial

My judicial philosophy is straightforward.

Illegal immigration is crisis for our country. It is an open door for drugs, criminals, and potential terrorists to enter our country. It is straining our economy, adding costs to our judicial, healthcare, and education systems.

And everything was made of paper: sentences, pardons, pleas, bad records, demerits, proof of guilt, but never, it seemed, proof of innocence. If there were no paper, Carter felt, the entire judicial system would collapse and disappear.

The New Deal Court was now in place. It had already sounded the death knell for such doctrines of the old Court as "freedom of contract," and a limiting view of congressional authority under the Commerce Clause.

a frank acknowledgment that there is not under our Constitution a judicial remedy for every political mischief, for every undesirable exercise of legislative power.

A judge without impartiality is like a priest without faith. Good faith in the judicial system is underscored by a belief in impartiality.

The scale of these "cleansing executions" – judicial murder after summary trials – alarmed even Himmler who was visiting in October 1940, though obviously he was concerned not with the humanitarian issue but the wastage of much-needed "Aryan" labour.

clear parallel between Francoist judicial practice and that of the Nazis – in that both, unlike the Soviet case, overturned previous liberal jurisprudence/practice.

I am as sober as a judge.

I had the longest judicial vacancy in the history of the United States - on the Eastern District of North Carolina. Not many people know that.

Now judicial review, beloved by conservatives, can, of course, fulfill the excellent function of declaring government interventions and tyrannies unconstitutional. But it can also validate and legitimize the government in the eyes of the people by declaring these actions valid and constitutional.

The first session of the Congress of the United States under the Constitution was devoted principally to the problems of immediate revenues and administrative and judicial organization.

Last year, I was proud to be an original co-sponsor of legislation that would increase federal judges' salaries by more than 40 percent. It also built in a cost of living adjustment, so the Judicial Branch would not be dependent on the Legislative Branch for increases each year.

Since I have difficulty defining merit and what merit alone means - and in any context, whether it's judicial or otherwise - I accept that different experiences in and of itself, bring merit to the system.

The court makes an amazing amount of decisions that ought to be made by the people.

That's the whole point of... of prosecutorial discretion in the judicial system. It's finding a just outcome in an individual case.

The convention debated at length over how the members of the Supreme Court should be selected, eventually settling on nomination by the president and confirmation by the Senate. By providing that federal judges "shall hold their offices during good Behaviour," the delegates intended to protect judicial independence.

Although the delegates appear to have assumed that the federal courts would exercise some form of judicial review over federal and state laws, Article III says nothing explicit on the subject. It states in broad terms that the federal courts' judicial power "shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties.

This early rejection of an advisory role established a lasting principle: that the federal courts have the constitutional power to decide only those questions that arise in the context of disputes between opposing parties.

He sought a writ of mandamus, a judicial order commanding the delivery of his commission. It seemed a readily available remedy, because Congress in the Judiciary Act of 1789 had explicitly provided that citizens could go directly to the Supreme Court to seek a writ of mandamus against a federal official.

The decision's significance, of course, lay in the Court's assertion of authority to review the constitutionality of acts of Congress. "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is," Marshall declared—a line that the Court has invoked throughout its history, down to the present. In the guise of modestly disclaiming authority to act, the Court had assumed for itself great power.

When the Court has interpreted the Constitution, it has acted within the province of the Judicial Branch, which embraces the duty to say what the law is,

I do not think that we should select judges based on a particular philosophy as opposed to temperament, commitment to judicial neutrality and commitment to other more constant values as to which there is general consensus.

Obama was particularly offended, as he put it, that "the National Security Agency has been spying on Americans without judicial approval." Justifying