The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts. A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law. The Life of John Marshall - Página 121por Albert Jeremiah Beveridge - 2005 - 700 páginasVista previa limitada - Acerca de este libro
| Bernard Schwartz - 1993 - 480 páginas
...were designed to keep the legislature within constitutional limits. "The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts....be regarded by the judges as a fundamental law. It must therefore belong to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act... | |
| Martin H. Redish - 1995 - 240 páginas
...Federalist No. 78, at 492 (Alexander Hamilton) (Benjamin F. Wright, ed. 1974) ("The interpretation of law is the proper and peculiar province of the courts....constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by judges, as fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning. . . ."). I have... | |
| William Quirk, R. Randall Bridwell - 1995 - 143 páginas
...authority." The "interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts", and a "constitution is in fact, and must be regarded by the judges as a fundamental law." This does not, Hamilton concluded, make the judicial superior to the legislative — it "only supposes... | |
| George Wescott Carey - 1994 - 220 páginas
..."the interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts." Thus, because the Constitution "is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges as, a fundamental law," ascertaining its meaning, "as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative... | |
| Elvind Smith - 1995 - 424 páginas
...widespread belief that it would be applied by the judges.16 In Federalist No. 78, Hamilton insisted that the Constitution "is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law,"17 and Marbury v. Madison emphasized precisely the same point. 18 Only after it was assumed that... | |
| Glenn Burgess - 1996 - 252 páginas
...onwards): see Hamilton in The Federalist Papers, ed. Clinton Rossiter (New York, 1961), no. 78, p. 467: 'A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges as, a fundamental law.' 37. Perhaps these remarks do something to clarify the question of the anachronism of the concept of... | |
| Noel B. Reynolds, W. Cole Durham - 2003 - 320 páginas
...Posterity, 163-64. This is the language of The Federalist as well when Publius [Alexander Hamilton] writes: A constitution is in fact, and must be, regarded by the judges as a fundamental law. . . . where the will of the legislature declared in its statutes, stands in opposition to that of the... | |
| Andy Williams - 1998 - 230 páginas
...the document. In The Federalist No. 78, Alexander Hamilton declares, 'The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts....be, regarded by the judges as a fundamental law. It must therefore belong to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act... | |
| Elliot E. Slotnick - 1999 - 666 páginas
...things, to keep the latter within the limits assigned to their authority. The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts....must be regarded by the judges as a fundamental law . . . That which has superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred . . . The Constitution... | |
| Ellis Sandoz - 1999 - 253 páginas
...language of The Federalist as well, as can be seen in this passage by Publius [Alexander Hamilton] : "A constitution is in fact, and must be, regarded by the judges as a fundamental law. . . . where the will of the legislature declared in its statutes, stands in opposition to that of the... | |
| |