Court : US Supreme Court
..... adhere to union rules. because of mounting objections to the closed shop, in 1947 -- after hearings and full consideration -- congress enacted the taft-hartley act. section 8(a)(3) of that act effectively eliminated compulsory union membership by outlawing the closed shop. the union security agreements permitted by 8(a)(3) require employees to pay dues, but an ..... never consented to." post at 473 u. s. 120 . this position is inconsistent with the court's holding in nlrb v. marine & shipbuilding worker, 391 u. s. 418 (1968). in that case, the court held invalid a union rule requiring the "exhaust[ion of] all remedies and appeals within the union . . . before . . . resort to any ..... 10-day period once a year illegitimate because it does not vindicate any legitimate union interest). thus in nlrb v. marine workers, 391 u. s. 418 (1968), the court held invalid an internal union rule that denied members access to the nlrb because the rule violated policies of speedy access to the board implicated by .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... enacted cercla in response to similar concerns. cercla imposes an excise tax on petroleum and other specified chemicals. the act establishes a trust fund, commonly known as "superfund," 87.5% of which is financed through the excise tax, and the remainder through general revenues. superfund money may be used to clean up releases ..... s fees in action against any person liable to the claimant or to the fund]; and" "(4) payment of costs specified under subsection (c) of this section [providing for research, restoration or replacement of natural resources, prevention of releases, equipment and overhead, and administrative costs]." "the president shall not pay for any ..... or expenses out of the fund unless such costs and expenses are reasonably necessary for and incidental to the implementation of this subchapter." [ footnote 3 ] section 104 of cercla, 42 u.s.c. 9604, which sets out procedures for governmental response to hazardous substance releases, provides that state and local governments, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... and that seeks to prevent dilution of the distinctiveness of a mark, label, or form of advertisement. '''(4) the following shall not be actionable under this section: "'(a) fair use of a famous mark by another person in comparative commercial advertising or promotion to identify the competing goods or services of the owner ..... the capacity of a famous mark to identify and distinguish goods or services." 1 the question we granted ithe ftda provides: "sec. 3. remedies for dilution of famous marks. "(a) remedies.-section 43 of the trademark act of 1946 (15 u. s. c. 1125) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: "'(c)( ..... of news reporting and news commentary.' "(b) conforming amendment.-the heading for title viii of the trademark act of 1946 is amended by striking 'and false descriptions' and inserting " false descriptions, and dilution.' "sec. 4. definition. "section 45 of the trademark act of 1946 (15 u. s. c. 1127) is amended by inserting after the paragraph defining when .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... availed himself or herself of another country s protections, 1158(c)(2)(d). [w]here congress includes particular language in one section of a statute but omits it in another section of the same act, it is generally presumed that congress acts intentionally and purposely in the disparate inclusion or exclusion. russello, supra , at 23 (internal quotation marks omitted); see, e ..... . 150 (july 28, 1951) (hereinafter convention), reprinted in 19 u. s. t. 6259, and the 1967 united nations protocol relating to the status of refugees, jan. 31, 1967, [1968] 19 u. s. t. 6223, t. i. a. s. no. 6577 (hereinafter protocol). these treaties place a mandatory obligation on signatory states not to expel or return ( refouler ) ..... agreed to in the 1967 united nations protocol relating to the status of refugees, jan. 31, 1967, 19 u. s. t. 6224, t. i. a. s. 6577 (1968), as well as the united nations convention relating to the status of refugees, 189 u. n. t. s. 150 (july 28, 1951), reprinted in 19 u. s. t. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... unauthorized aliens. cf. bates v. united states , 522 u. s. 23 , 29 30 (1997) ( where congress includes particular language in one section of a statute but omits it in another section of the same act, it is generally presumed that congress acts intentionally and purposely in the disparate inclusion or exclusion (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted)). in an attempt to show that congress ..... reading prevents state law from undermining the act and from turning the pre-emption clause on its head. that is why i consider it the better reading of the statute. iv another section of the arizona statute requires every employer, after hiring an employee, to verify the employment eligibility of the employee through the federal government s e-verify program. ariz. rev .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... jury might take notice of, if they pleased, by lessening the damages. the court were unanimous and clear in their opinion, that the act of 32 h. 8 did extend to this province, and gave it in charge to the jury accordingly. * the verdict of the ..... (1767) for the plaintiffs it was answered, that in 2 peere williams 75, and many other cases, it was settled that all acts of parliament made before the settlement of the colony extend, unless local in their nature; that under this rule the statute of wills, ..... that though the statute of 32 h. 8 should be extended, yet this case was not within it; because, 1st the act was made on a presumption that there might have been regular conveyances and lost, but here it appears there was no conveyance at ..... been the opinion of the legislature of this province, that these statutes of limitations did not extend, by their having made an act to limit personal actions in the very words of the statute of james.* it was likewise contended on the part of the defendant .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... secretary of the treasury, in conformity with the provision of a law of the last session of congress, yesterday drew a bill upon the minister of state and finance of the french government for the first installment and the interest thereupon, and for the interest upon the remaining installments, which interest is stipulated to be paid by ..... of america and france made 4 july, a.d., 1831, and ratified 2 february, a.d., 1832 ( prout same), together with an act of congress passed 13 july, 1832 (prout) , by the seventh section of which it was made the duty of the secretary of the treasury" "to cause the several installments, with the interest payable thereon, ..... at the treasury department of the united states, washington, 7 february, 1833, by the secretary of the treasury on the minister and secretary of state for the department of finance of the kingdom of france for 4,856,666 66/100 francs, payable at sight to the order of defendants' cashier ( prout bill); and the several endorsements thereon, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... as informer or seizing officer, and no other share was allowed to him." on these facts, the page 107 u. s. 404 claimant contends that under the provisions of sec. 1 of the act of march 2, 1867, c. 188, 14 stat. 546, he was entitled, for the period from june 13, 1872, to april 28, 1874, to share equally with the ..... that district, which were ports of delivery and not ports of entry. in accordance with the uniform practice of the treasury department, under sec. 1 of the act of march 2, 1867, c. 188, repealed by sec. 2 of the act of june 22, 1874, c. 391, the secretary of the treasury distributed to the collector, naval officer, and surveyor at the port of ..... the port where the fines, penalties, and forfeitures page 107 u. s. 406 were incurred. the court observed that as the provisions of the act of 1867 awarding shares of forfeitures had been repealed by sec. 2 of the act of june 22, 1874, c. 391, 18 stat. 186, and as congress had not interfered with such construction by the secretary of the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... 151. each was required to take an inventory of its materials and supplies. general order no. 10, id., p. 170. each federal treasurer was to deal with the finances of a single system; his bank account was to be designated "(name of railroad), federal account." general order no. 37, id., p. 313. each of 165 systems ..... itself to be sued was compensation, not punishment. in issuing general order no. 50, the director general was careful to confine the order to the limits set by the act, by concluding the first paragraph of the order, "provided, however, that this order shall not apply to actions, suits, or proceedings for the recovery of fines, ..... in terms, continues the liability of "carriers while under federal control" and permits suit against them, it should be construed as subjecting the companies to liability for acts or omissions of the railroad administration, although they are deprived of all power over the properties and the personnel. and it is said that this construction would not .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... a year later, deportability because of membership in described subversive organizations was introduced. 40 stat. 1012; 41 stat. 1008. when this court, in 1939, held that that act reached only aliens who were members when the proceedings against them were instituted, kessler v. strecker, 307 u. s. 22 , congress promptly enacted the statute before us, ..... 595 the alien, is not a punishment. . . . the inhibition against the passage of an ex post facto law by congress in section 9 of article 1 of the constitution applies only to criminal laws . . . , and not to a deportation act like this. . . ." mabler v. eby, 264 u. s. 32 , 264 u. s. 39 . it is urged ..... . reform in this field must be entrusted to the branches of the government in control of our international relations and treatymaking powers. we hold that the act is not invalid under the due process clause. these aliens are not entitled to judicial relief unless some other constitutional limitation has been transgressed, to which inquiry .....
Tag this Judgment!