0
People are innocent until proven guilty, It is hard to prove a person guilty of breaking a law if you don't know for sure what the law means. The plaintiff can argue not only that he did not do what he is accused of doing, but even if he did, it was not against the law.
The concepts of "vagueness" and "overbreadth" are different from one another although both involve violation of the due process clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.
A law that is unconstitutionally vague will not be enforced if it does not give individuals adequate notice as to what conduct is proscribed by the particular statute and allows for arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement. Due process requires that individuals be able to understand with reasonable certainty what types of conduct are permitted and what types are prohibited.
A law that is unconstitutionally overbroad will not be enforced if conduct that is constitutionally permissible falls within the description of conduct the law prohibits. Due process requires that laws that properly prohibit certain activity do not at the same time prohibit constitutionally protected activity.
What else can I help you with?
How does the court enforce it's decisions on executive and legislative branches?
It doesn't. The president or congress could ignore them to their hearts content, and the court would have no way to stop them.
How might a president limit the power of the Supreme Court?
"the court has made its decision, now let them try to enforce it". This may not answer the question fully, but as the court has no way to enforce its decisions, it depends on the President to enforce it for them. I recall school issue of segregation in the south when Eisenhouer sent federal troops to ensure the blacks entered white schools. If he had not, the courts order would not have been enforced by the states in that region. Recently, a federal judge ruled on "dont ask dont tell". If the President didnt agree with the courts ruling, and neither did the military. who would enforce the courts order?
How might a president limited the power of the Supreme Court?
"the court has made its decision, now let them try to enforce it". This may not answer the question fully, but as the court has no way to enforce its decisions, it depends on the President to enforce it for them. I recall school issue of segregation in the south when Eisenhouer sent federal troops to ensure the blacks entered white schools. If he had not, the courts order would not have been enforced by the states in that region. Recently, a federal judge ruled on "dont ask dont tell". If the President didnt agree with the courts ruling, and neither did the military. who would enforce the courts order?
How would you use the word vague?
He was very vague about the subject of his new book.
An example of vague?
A Vague would be a person that is daydreaming or not paying attention to something or someone.
Can you have the mothe sign something so she cant go to court later to make you pay child support?
The courts will not enforce such an agreement, it would be contrary to public policy.
Who can nullify an Act of Congress?
The Supreme Court can nullify an Act of Congress. They would have to say that it specifically contridicted the Constitution. The President could affect a law by refusing to enforce it.
If the Supreme Court of the US had issued the writ of mandamus how could it have forced Madison to comply with the order What would have happened if he had ignored it (In other words does the Court ha?
If the Supreme Court had issued a writ of mandamus to compel Secretary of State James Madison to deliver the commission for William Marbury, it would have been a direct order requiring Madison to act. However, the Court lacked enforcement power; compliance would depend on the executive branch, which was led by President Thomas Jefferson, who opposed Marbury's appointment. If Madison had ignored the order, the Court would have had no practical means to enforce it, leading to a constitutional crisis and a potential conflict between the judicial and executive branches. This situation highlighted the limitations of judicial power and the reliance on the executive to enforce court decisions.
Is the word vague a noun?
It is an adjective. ex: The vague boy went to the store If it was a noun the sentence would not make sense. The vague went to the store.
Who would be present at a court case?
That is a bit vague, but in general, the players are: The Judge The plaintiff and/or their attorney (civil) or a prosecutor (criminal) The defendant/respondent and/or their attorney The various court personnel like the bailiff and clerk Possibly a jury. Other citizens waiting their turn or court watching. Possibly reporters.
How is an intermediate court different from an appellate court?
"Intermediate court" or "intermediate appellate court" usually refers to the appellate court between the trial court and final court of appeal (Supreme Court or equivalent). An intermediate appellate court is where the first appeal of a case would be filed. The term refers to the same courts, but "intermediate court" is a vague colloquialism that's not often used in the legal system; most of the time, people refer to a specific appellate court by name, or to the "appellate courts" or "court of appeals," in general.
Legal action againt a parent that drop medical insurance for child?
The question is not entirely clear as written. However, if you are asking if there is a cause of action against a parent who drops medical insurance coverage on a child, the answer is, "maybe". If the obligation to maintain medical insurance is imposed by the court, such as by being part of a divorce and custody award, the court always has the power to enforce the requirement. The lack of insurance needs to be brought to the court's attention by the party seeking to enforce the award, as the court would not otherwise have any reason to know whether or not there has been compliance.
