Block, SkipCaptcha, apieditor, Automoderated users, Bots, edit, ratelimit-exempt
58,636
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 9:
Line 9: − + − +
→top: clean up & uniformity
''In re Griffiths'', decided the same day, reflects the narrowness of the exception. In that case, despite a recognition of the vital public and political role of attorneys, the Court found invalid a state-court rule limiting the practice of law to citizens. 413 U.S. at 729.
''In re Griffiths'', decided the same day, reflects the narrowness of the exception. In that case, despite a recognition of the vital public and political role of attorneys, the Court found invalid a state-court rule limiting the practice of law to citizens. 413 U.S. at 729.
[[category:United States Supreme Court Cases]]
[[Category:United States Supreme Court Cases]]
[[category:Fourteenth Amendment]]
[[Category:Fourteenth Amendment]]