Citation network
Pennsylvania Vs. Nelson
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 02, 1956
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 497 (1956) U.S. Supreme Court Pennsylvania v. NelsonSearch
-
U.S. 497 (1956) Pennsylvania v. NelsonSearch
-
given them concurrent jurisdiction, as was done under the Eighteenth Amendment and the Volstead Act. United States v. LanzaSearch
-
where the same act constitutes both a federal offense and a state offense under the police power, as was done in Fox v. OhioSearch
-
How. 410, and Gilbert v. MinnesotaSearch
-
U. S. 52 , 312 U. S. 67 . And see Rice v. SantaSearch
-
Rice v. SantaSearch
-
it purports to supplement the federal law. As was said by Mr. Justice Holmes in Charleston & Western Carolina R. Co. v. VarnvilleSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Fe Elevator Corp., 331 U.S. at 331 U. S. 230 , citing Hines v. DavidowitzSearch
-
Jerome v. UnitedSearch
-
Cf. Winters v. NewSearch
-
of a state statute was in issue . . . when the Supreme Court upheld the validity of the state statutes in Gitlow v. NewSearch
-
York, 268 U. S. 652 (1925), and Whitney v. CaliforniaSearch
-
United States v. MesaroshSearch
-
Garner v. TeamstersSearch
-
when it conflicts with the comprehensive regulatory scheme and purpose of a federal plan. Cloverleaf Butter Co. v. PattersonSearch
-
they must preclude state laws on the same subject. This concept is suggested in a comment on Hines v. DavidowitzSearch
-
may enact criminal statutes for mutual protection unless Congress has otherwise provided. It was so held in Gilbert v. MinnesotaSearch
-
that States may provide concurrent legislation in the absence of explicit congressional intent to the contrary. Sexton v. CaliforniaSearch
-
the Court's opinion, p. 350 U. S. 499 , and its last paragraph, p. 350 U. S. 509 . See United States v. LanzaSearch
-
Fox v. OhioSearch
-
Cong.Rec. 10452. In fact, the Smith Act was patterned on the New York Criminal Anarchy Statute. Commonwealth v. NelsonSearch
-
is set out in the hearings before Subcommittee No. 3, supra, p. 1, and the New York Act may be read in Gitlow v. NewSearch
-
In Allen-Bradley Local v. BoardSearch
-
Such efforts may be punishable crimes. Dennis v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Pennsylvania v. NelsonSearch
-
the Eighteenth Amendment and the Volstead Act. United States v. LanzaSearch
-
and Gilbert v. MinnesotaSearch
-
Charleston & Western Carolina R. Co. v. VarnvilleSearch
-
Gitlow v. NewSearch
-
and Whitney v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Sexton v. CaliforniaSearch
-
See United States v. LanzaSearch
-
the New York Criminal Anarchy Statute. Commonwealth v. NelsonSearch
-
Dennis v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial