Judicial interpretation

The Judica-Cordiglia brothers are two Italian former amateur radio operators who made audio recordings that allegedly support the conspiracy theory that the Soviet space program covered up cosmonaut deaths in the 1960s. The pair claimed to have acquired recordings of several secret Soviet space missions that ended in tragedy and mystery. This has generated public interest for more than 50 years, despite there being a large number of detailed rebuttals to the brothers' claims.

The Judicial Code of 1911 (Pub.L. 61–475, 36 Stat. 1087, enacted March 3, 1911) abolished the United States circuit courts and transferred their trial jurisdiction to the U.S. district courts.In 1911, the United States Congress created a single code encompassing all statutes related to the judiciary and took the opportunity to revise and unify existing laws. At the same time, Congress abolished the U.S. circuit courts as of January 1, 1912, the effective date of the statute. Established by the Judiciary Act of 1789, the circuit courts served as the most important trial courts of the federal judiciary for over a century. The circuit courts lost their limited appellate jurisdiction in the Judiciary Act of 1891, which created the U.S. courts of appeals, but as part of the political compromise behind the 1891 Act, the circuit courts continued to serve as trial courts alongside the district courts for the next 20 years. By abolishing the circuit courts and transferring their jurisdiction and pending business to the district courts, Congress instituted a judicial system with a single type of trial court and eliminated the inefficiencies associated with administering two types of court that were often presided over by the same judge.The remainder of the Judicial Code of 1911 was not so much a reorganization of the structure or procedures of the federal courts as it was a standardization of law governing the judiciary. Over more than 120 years, many contradictory statutes had accumulated through legislation approved for the purpose of organizing individual courts. Congress had first gathered the statutes related to the judiciary into a single code in the Revised Statutes adopted in 1874, but the resulting Title XIII preserved all of the legislation then in effect without reconciling the varying rules and court structures that often applied to the same types of courts in different parts of the country. In 1899, Congress appointed a commission to recommend revisions in the judicial code, and the subsequent report became the basis of the proposed revision submitted to Congress in March 1910.The broad reconsideration of judicial statutes encouraged some members of Congress to use the proposed code as a means to enact a substantial reorganization of the courts or to win approval for major legislation indirectly related to the judicial function. Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives offered amendments to restrict the issuance of injunctions in labor disputes, and House members revived the debate over the monetary value required to establish diversity jurisdiction in cases involving parties from different states. They hoped that a $5000 limit, up from $2000, would restrict the ability of corporations to remove cases from the state courts. The House narrowly defeated an amendment that would have sharply limited the ability of a corporation to remove a case regardless of the amount involved. The approved code increased the jurisdictional amount to $3000, but for the most part Congress resisted the suggestions to enact major new legislation through the revised code. The abolition of the circuit courts prompted numerous lesser changes, the most significant of which was the provision authorizing a senior circuit judge or circuit justice to assign a circuit judge to hold a district court "whenever … the public interest shall require."
The Judicial Code of 1911 and the abolition of the U.S. Circuit Courts

Race legislation in the United States is defined as legislation seeking to direct relations between so-called "races" (a social construct) or ethnic groups. It has had several historical phases in the United States, developing from the European colonization of the Americas, the triangular slave trade, and the American Indian Wars. The 1776 Declaration of Independence included the statement that "all men are created equal," which has ultimately inspired actions and legislation against slavery and racial discrimination. Such actions have led to passage of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the United States Constitution.The first period extends until the Civil War and the Reconstruction era, the second spans the nadir of American race relations period through the early 20th century; the last period begins with World War II and the following increased civil rights movement, leading to the repeal of racial segregation laws. Race legislation has been intertwined with immigration laws, which sometimes included specific provisions against particular nationalities or ethnicities (i.e. Chinese Exclusion Act or 1923 United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind case).

Judicial interpretation are different ways the judiciary uses to interpret the law, particularly constitutional documents and legislation. This is an impactful problem in many common law jurisdictions, such as the United States, Australia or Canada because the supreme courts of those nations can overturn laws made by their individual legislatures via judicial review.For example, the United States Supreme Court has decided such topics as the legality of slavery as in the Dred Scott decision, desegregation as in the Brown v Board of Education decision, and abortion rights as in the Roe v Wade decision. As a result, how justices interpret the constitution, and the ways in which they approach this task, has a political aspect. Terms describing types of judicial interpretation can be ambiguous; for example, the term judicial conservatism can vary in meaning depending on what is trying to be "conserved". One can look at judicial interpretation along a continuum from judicial restraint to judicial activism, with different viewpoints along the continuum.

Judicial appointment history for United States federal courts

The Judicial Code of 1911 (Pub.L. 61–475, 36 Stat. 1087, enacted March 3, 1911) abolished the United States circuit courts and transferred their trial jurisdiction to the U.S. district courts.In 1911, the United States Congress created a single code encompassing all statutes related to the judiciary and took the opportunity to revise and unify existing laws. At the same time, Congress abolished the U.S. circuit courts as of January 1, 1912, the effective date of the statute.

yes

Judicial aspects of race in the United States

Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1891

The appointment of federal judges for United States federal courts has become viewed as a political process in the last several decades. This is especially true of U.S. Supreme Court and court of appeals appointments. The tables below provide the composition of the Supreme and circuit courts at the end of each four year presidential term, categorizing the judges by the presidential term during which they were nominated for their seat.As of March 2014 a majority of the federal appeals courts have a majority of Democratic appointees. However, the party of the president who appointed a judge is not always a good indicator of that judge's judicial philosophy and place on the political spectrum.

Judicial interpretation are different ways the judiciary uses to interpret the law, particularly constitutional documents and legislation.

Judica-Cordiglia brothers

Race legislation in the United States is defined as legislation seeking to direct relations between so-called "races" (a social construct) or ethnic groups. It has had several historical phases in the United States, developing from the European colonization of the Americas, the triangular slave trade, and the American Indian Wars.

Judicature Acts
England and Wales
Parliament of the United Kingdom

The appointment of federal judges for United States federal courts has become viewed as a political process in the last several decades. This is especially true of U.S. Supreme Court and court of appeals appointments.

Judicial Code of 1911