http://www.oyez.org/issues/civil-rights/residency-requirements-active-duty/ U.S. Supreme Court Decisions, presented by The Oyez Project (www.oyez.org) en-us <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1965/1965_40/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1973/1973_73_604/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1992/1992_91_1353/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1956/1956_620/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1959/1959_58/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1957/1957_80/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1956/1956_619/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1955/1955_713/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1959/1959_22/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1958/1958_42/ <p>Does the President have the authority, consistent with the separation-of-powers principle, to prescribe aggravating factors that permit a court-martial to impose the death penalty upon a member of the armed forces convicted of murder?</p><p>Yes. In a unanimous opinion delivered by Justice Anthony Kennedy, the Court held that not only does the Constitution require the aggravating factors of the military's death penalty, but that the President's prescription of the challenged aggravating factors did not violate the separation-of-powers principle. Justice Kennedy wrote, "[a]lthough it may not delegate the power to make the law...Congress may delegate to others the authority or discretion to execute the law under and in pursuance of its terms."</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1995/1995_94_1966/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1959/1959_21/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1974/1974_73_1346/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_646/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1973/1973_73_206/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1955/1955_701_2/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1955/1955_701/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_98/ <p>Is it proper to accord de facto validity to the actions of civilian judges on a military appellate panel, when the accused challenges the composition of the panel as a violation of the Constitution's Appointments Clause?</p><p>No. In a unanimous opinion delivered by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the Court held that the judges' actions were not valid de facto. The Court reasoned that a defendant who made a timely challenge to the constitutional validity of the appointment of an officer who adjudicates his case was entitled to a decision on the merits of the question and whatever relief may be appropriate if a violation had occurred. The Court also noted that review by the properly constituted Court of Military Appeals did not necessarily give Ryder all the possibility for relief that review by a properly constituted Coast Guard Court of Military Review would have given him.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1994/1994_94_431/ <p>Did Eisenhower exceed his powers to commute criminal sentences?</p><p>The Court dismissed Schick's claim that Eisenhower's action was invalid because it imposed a condition not authorized by the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Tracing the development and Court's interpretation of the President's powers to commute sentences, Chief Justice Burger argued that since the pardoning power is an enumerated one, any limit on it must be found in the Constitution. Thus, its use does not depend on statutes such as those found in the military code.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1974/1974_73_5677/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1974/1974_73_662/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1973/1973_72_1713/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1965/1965_16/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1986/1986_85_1581/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_45/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1976/1976_76_413/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1993/1993_92_1482/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1991/1991_90_889/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1957/1957_1103/