Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Central High School (1)
- Chief executive (1)
- Civil Rights Act (1)
- Civilian (1)
- Court-martial (1)
-
- Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins (1)
- Fifth Amendment (1)
- Governor power (1)
- In re Neagle (1)
- Integration (1)
- Judicial Determination (1)
- Kinsella v. Krueger (1)
- Little Rock (1)
- Missouri v. Holland (1)
- Moyer v. Peabody (1)
- National Guard (1)
- Presidential power (1)
- Reid v. Covert (1)
- Separation of powers doctrine (1)
- Sixth Amendment (1)
- State action (1)
- Sterling v. Constantin (1)
- Uniform Code of Military Justice (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Rule of Law
Constitutional Law - Courts-Martial - Power Of Congress To Provide For Military Jurisdiction Over Civilian Dependents, Gerald M. Smith
Constitutional Law - Courts-Martial - Power Of Congress To Provide For Military Jurisdiction Over Civilian Dependents, Gerald M. Smith
Michigan Law Review
Defendants, civilian wives of servicemen living overseas, were tried and convicted of murder by military court-martial under article 118 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Their trials took place in the countries where they were living with their husbands. Defendants brought petitions for a writ of habeas corpus challenging the constitutionality of article 2(11) of the Uniform Code authorizing their trials by court-martial. Initially the United States Supreme Court rejected this contention. On rehearing, held, reversed, two justices dissenting. The guarantee of the right to jury trial contained in article 3, section 2, and the guarantees of the …
Constitutional Law - Executive Powers - Use Of Troops To Enforce Federal Laws, Robert H. Elliott Jr., S.Ed., Richard I. Singer S.Ed.
Constitutional Law - Executive Powers - Use Of Troops To Enforce Federal Laws, Robert H. Elliott Jr., S.Ed., Richard I. Singer S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
The recent use of federal troops in Little Rock, Arkansas to enforce the order of a federal district court requiring school integration has occasioned widespread controversy throughout the nation. It is the purpose of this comment to examine the constitutionality of such action and to consider its broader implications with respect to federal-state and congressional-executive relationships.