There were a few challenges that have advances in technology for Supreme court. This was what interpret the Bill of Rights.
There were a few challenges that have advances in technology for Supreme court. This was what interpret the Bill of Rights.
Conservatives
Conservatives
The Supreme Court Justices interpret and enforce the US Constitution. The US Constitution is the ultimate "Law of the Land", to which they are bound.
Justices Ginsburg and Breyer agreed that a company should be liable for the illegal use of its technology in the Grokster case. The company is only liable if it actively promotes the illegal uses of its technology.
The Supreme Court sit for life. The thinking on this was they would be free of political restrictions and policies to be able to interpret law according to the constitution.
The election process, especially the fundraising part, might influence how they interpret the law, introducing the potential of compromising their impartiality.
judges if laws and acts of the legislative and executive branches are constitutional
at the time of election for new justices the president nominates the justices and the senate approves the nominated justices.
there are about how mean justices on the Supreme Court.
No. The president has no direct part in amending the Constitution. He can lobby for Constitutional changes and if given the opportunity, can nominate Supreme Court justices who may interpret the Constitution in ways that amount that amount to changes.
The interpretive theory is known as contextualism, but judges or justices who are proponents of contextualism (and/or a Living Constitution) are often also accused of being judicial activists.
Justices of the peace!the justices of the peace was a police man.