Yes. The law is still "on the books" and enforceable - UNLESS the Federal Judge "stayed" its application until such time as the appeals process was decided.
Lopez "won". Lopez was a high student who brought a gun into school. He was charged with violating Gun Free School Zone Act of 1990. He was tried and convicted. He appealed the decision, saying Congress didn't have a right to legislate guns in the way the did (through the interstate commerce clause). The appeals court agreed. The government appealed the appeals court decision to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court affirmed the appeals court ruling in a 5-4 decision (essentially overturning Lopez' conviction) saying that while Congress has broad powers under the commerce clause, that power was not limitless.
Thomas Paine appeals to patriotism in his speech.
No, illegal means that one is breaking the law. Unconstitutional means that a law is not in compliance with the constitution. That does not mean that anyone will be charged with criminal activities. It usually means that a law is no longer valid and anyone charged under that law will not be prosecuted and any conviction will be overturned.
The American Liberty League charged the New Deal with limiting individual freedom in an unconstitutional, "un-American" manner. To them, programs such as compulsory unemployment insurance smacked of "Bolshevism," a reference to the political philosophy of the founders of the Soviet Union.
Yes, you can. Also, your testimony can be used against you.
In the United States, all court systems must provide an appeals process for hearings and trials; therefore, there are appellate courts charged with the responsibility of considering appeals from every type of trial or hearing court/tribunal/panel. Limited and general jurisdiction covers pretty much everything.
Once an appeal is filed and the court agrees to hear it, it is a waiting game. There is no testimony in an appeals case so you don't go back to court. The appeals process is there to make sure no errors were done courtside. It is there to review evidence, etc. and make sure the court proceedings were done appropriately and to all legal specifications. It does not find guilt or innocence. If the appeals court finds something wrong the case will be thrown out and you can still be charged again. If they find all is well, the conviction will stick.
Marbury v. Madison, case decided in 1803 by the U.S. Supreme Court. William Marbury had been commissioned justice of the peace in the District of Columbia by President John Adams in the "midnight appointments" at the very end of his administration. When the new administration did not deliver the commission, Marbury sued James Madison, Jefferson's Secretary of State. (At that time the Secretary of State was charged with certain domestic duties as well as with conducting foreign affairs.) Chief Justice John Marshall held that, although Marbury was entitled to the commission, the statute that was the basis of the particular remedy sought was unconstitutional because it gave the Supreme Court authority that was implicitly denied it by Article 3 of the U.S. Constitution. The decision was the first by the Supreme Court to declare unconstitutional and void an act passed by Congress that the Court considered in violation of the Constitution. The decision established the doctrine of judicial review, which recognizes the authority of courts to declare statutes unconstitutional.
He was charged with breaking a law that he believed to be unconstitutional. The law was passed by Republicans during his administration over his veto, and it was designed to limit his actions. He was acquitted by one vote.
"Affirmed" means the appeals court found no error or cause to reverse the decision of the lower court, and upheld the original decision. This means the decision of the lower court is final, unless the losing party petitions a higher court of appeal (if one exists). If the highest court capable of reviewing the case affirms the lower court decision, the decision is binding and the case legal complete (res judicata).When an appellate court 'affirms' the decision, they are agreeing with the lower court.As an example, let's say:Matt is arrested and charged with first degree murder. During the trial, it comes out that the police did not read Matt his Miranda Rights. If Matt is convicted of murder, he has the option to appeal to a higher court.Matt appeals over the fact that he was not read his rights after arrest. If the appellate court 'affirms' the previous court's decision, Matt's appeal was dismissed (or Matt lost).Matt would still be forced to serve the first degree murder sentence.
Courts of appeals review decisions made by lower courts and serve as a step between them and the next higher court, which is usually the supreme court at the state or federal level. They were created to promote efficiency and eliminate backlogs for higher courts.
If you are speaking of a working in a poistion where you must be bonded by your employer - - Bonding companies are private insurance companies and their decision to insure you (bond you) is strictly a business decision in which the law plays no part.