Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
No change in size ,  13:56, July 13, 2016
→‎top: clean up & uniformity
Line 14: Line 14:     
:In view of the TIA's text, the congressional judgment that state courts are qualified constitutional arbiters, and the respect state courts deserve, I disagree with the majority's superseding the balance the Act strikes between federal and state court adjudication. I agree with the majority that the petition for certiorari was timely under 28 U.S.C. § 2101(c)[28 USCS § 2101(c)], see ante, at 96-99, 159 L. Ed. 2d, at 183-184, and so submit this respectful dissent on the merits of the decision.
 
:In view of the TIA's text, the congressional judgment that state courts are qualified constitutional arbiters, and the respect state courts deserve, I disagree with the majority's superseding the balance the Act strikes between federal and state court adjudication. I agree with the majority that the petition for certiorari was timely under 28 U.S.C. § 2101(c)[28 USCS § 2101(c)], see ante, at 96-99, 159 L. Ed. 2d, at 183-184, and so submit this respectful dissent on the merits of the decision.
[[category:United States Supreme Court Cases]]
+
[[Category:United States Supreme Court Cases]]
[[category:jurisdiction]]
+
[[Category:Jurisdiction]]
[[category:Establishment Clause]]
+
[[Category:Establishment Clause]]
Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, Bots, edit
57,719

edits

Navigation menu