An appellate court, commonly called an appeals court or court of appeals (American English) or appeal court (British English), is any court of law that is empowered to hear an appeal of a trial court or other lower tribunal. In most jurisdictions, the court system is divided into at least three levels: the trial court, which initially hears cases and reviews evidence and testimony to determine the facts of the case; at least one intermediate appellate court; and a supreme court (or court of last resort) which primarily reviews the decisions of the intermediate courts. A jurisdiction's supreme court is that jurisdiction's highest appellate court. Appellate courts nationwide can operate by varying rules.
Many U.S. jurisdictions title their appellate court a court of appeal or court of appeals. Historically, others have titled their appellate court a court of errors (or court of errors and appeals), on the premise that it was intended to correct errors made by lower courts. Examples of such courts include the New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals (which existed from 1844 to 1947), the Connecticut Supreme Court of Errors (which has been renamed the Connecticut Supreme Court), the Kentucky Court of Errors (renamed the Kentucky Supreme Court), and the Mississippi High Court of Errors and Appeals (since renamed the Supreme Court of Mississippi). In some jurisdictions, courts able to hear appeals are known as an appellate division.
People v. Abney: Oral Argument in N.Y. Court of Appeals - Part 1
People v. Abney: Oral Argument in N.Y. Court of Appeals - Part 1
People v. Abney: Oral Argument in N.Y. Court of Appeals - Part 1
8:59
10. Circuit Court (Appellate Court)
10. Circuit Court (Appellate Court)
10. Circuit Court (Appellate Court)
An explanation of the circuit court's role in the federal court system.
1:23
What is an Appellate Court?
What is an Appellate Court?
What is an Appellate Court?
The end of the first trial is not necessarily the end of the case. Our courts system allow the losing side to appeal the decision and if it believes that the earlier court made a mistake. In...
4:33
Appellate court
Appellate court
Appellate court
An appellate court, commonly called an appeals court or court of appeals (American English) or appeal court (British English) or court of second instance or second instance court, is any court of law that is empowered to hear an appeal of a trial court or other lower tribunal. In most jurisdictions, the court system is divided into at least three levels: the trial court, which initially hears cases and reviews evidence and testimony to determine the facts of the case; at least one intermediate appellate court; and a supreme court (or court of last resort) which primarily reviews the decisions of the intermediate courts. A jurisdiction's supre
1:06
Appellate court
Appellate court
Appellate court
All about Appellate court. This is another Text 2 Audio transformation using Flite. Below is the transcript for the recording: An appellate court, commonly c...
1:36
The Difference in How an Appellate Court Views the Case
The Difference in How an Appellate Court Views the Case
The Difference in How an Appellate Court Views the Case
Kay Nord Hunt.
6:52
Appellate court ruling
Appellate court ruling
Appellate court ruling
What can I say
1:04
Appellate Court Rules NSA's Phone Data Collection Is Illegal
Appellate Court Rules NSA's Phone Data Collection Is Illegal
Appellate Court Rules NSA's Phone Data Collection Is Illegal
A federal appellate court ruled Thursday the NSA overstepped its boundaries in its practice of collecting Americans' phone metadata.
Follow Elizabeth Hagedorn: http://www.twitter.com/ElizHagedorn
See more at http://www.newsy.com
Sources:
2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/NSA_ca2_20150507.pdf
Electronic Frontier Foundation https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/03/white-house-confirms-if-section-215-expires-so-does-bulk-phone-records-collection
CNN http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/27/justice/nsa-ruling/
American Civil Liberties Union https://www.aclu.org/nsa-documents-search
Image via: Getty Images / Win McNamee
S
15:52
2008 Davis Moot Court Winning Oral Argument
2008 Davis Moot Court Winning Oral Argument
2008 Davis Moot Court Winning Oral Argument
Victoria Corder won the 2008 John W. Davis Appellate Advocacy Competition.
5:11
Appellate Court Nails NSA Spying and Patriot Act
Appellate Court Nails NSA Spying and Patriot Act
Appellate Court Nails NSA Spying and Patriot Act
Mayday, Mayday! A New York federal court just nailed the NSA for spying on Americans. In a 97-page ruling, the Second Circuit Court ruled that the heart and soul of the so-called Patriot Act, known as Section 215, is constitutionally flawed and it cannot be legally interpreted as allowing mass snooping on the phone calls of U.S. citizens!
The timing of this May 2015 ruling is extremely significant since the Patriot Act is set to expire on June 1, 2015.
This is causing power craving, ultra controlling politicians to have outright panic attacks. Unless they do something very quickly, they will be forced to honor constitutional rule of law. An
20:15
Oral Argument before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Oral Argument before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Oral Argument before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Arthur Shartsis - Oral Argument before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - Constitutional Law Question (July 11, 2014).
330:22
Appellate Court Live from RHS
Appellate Court Live from RHS
Appellate Court Live from RHS
15:00
The Need-to-Knows of Appeals & the Appeals Court
The Need-to-Knows of Appeals & the Appeals Court
The Need-to-Knows of Appeals & the Appeals Court
Judge Terri F. Love of Louisiana 4th Circuit Court of Appeal joins the Louisiana law talk show "John Redmann: Power of Attorney" to discuss the history and b...
9:27
Abrams Verdict: Siegelman Released From Jail
Abrams Verdict: Siegelman Released From Jail
Abrams Verdict: Siegelman Released From Jail
Dan Abrams talks to Artur Davis and Scott Horton about the release of Don Siegelman from prison tonight, and recaps some of his coverage on the story. Now wi...
People v. Abney: Oral Argument in N.Y. Court of Appeals - Part 1
People v. Abney: Oral Argument in N.Y. Court of Appeals - Part 1
People v. Abney: Oral Argument in N.Y. Court of Appeals - Part 1
8:59
10. Circuit Court (Appellate Court)
10. Circuit Court (Appellate Court)
10. Circuit Court (Appellate Court)
An explanation of the circuit court's role in the federal court system.
1:23
What is an Appellate Court?
What is an Appellate Court?
What is an Appellate Court?
The end of the first trial is not necessarily the end of the case. Our courts system allow the losing side to appeal the decision and if it believes that the earlier court made a mistake. In...
4:33
Appellate court
Appellate court
Appellate court
An appellate court, commonly called an appeals court or court of appeals (American English) or appeal court (British English) or court of second instance or second instance court, is any court of law that is empowered to hear an appeal of a trial court or other lower tribunal. In most jurisdictions, the court system is divided into at least three levels: the trial court, which initially hears cases and reviews evidence and testimony to determine the facts of the case; at least one intermediate appellate court; and a supreme court (or court of last resort) which primarily reviews the decisions of the intermediate courts. A jurisdiction's supre
1:06
Appellate court
Appellate court
Appellate court
All about Appellate court. This is another Text 2 Audio transformation using Flite. Below is the transcript for the recording: An appellate court, commonly c...
1:36
The Difference in How an Appellate Court Views the Case
The Difference in How an Appellate Court Views the Case
The Difference in How an Appellate Court Views the Case
Kay Nord Hunt.
6:52
Appellate court ruling
Appellate court ruling
Appellate court ruling
What can I say
1:04
Appellate Court Rules NSA's Phone Data Collection Is Illegal
Appellate Court Rules NSA's Phone Data Collection Is Illegal
Appellate Court Rules NSA's Phone Data Collection Is Illegal
A federal appellate court ruled Thursday the NSA overstepped its boundaries in its practice of collecting Americans' phone metadata.
Follow Elizabeth Hagedorn: http://www.twitter.com/ElizHagedorn
See more at http://www.newsy.com
Sources:
2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/NSA_ca2_20150507.pdf
Electronic Frontier Foundation https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/03/white-house-confirms-if-section-215-expires-so-does-bulk-phone-records-collection
CNN http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/27/justice/nsa-ruling/
American Civil Liberties Union https://www.aclu.org/nsa-documents-search
Image via: Getty Images / Win McNamee
S
15:52
2008 Davis Moot Court Winning Oral Argument
2008 Davis Moot Court Winning Oral Argument
2008 Davis Moot Court Winning Oral Argument
Victoria Corder won the 2008 John W. Davis Appellate Advocacy Competition.
5:11
Appellate Court Nails NSA Spying and Patriot Act
Appellate Court Nails NSA Spying and Patriot Act
Appellate Court Nails NSA Spying and Patriot Act
Mayday, Mayday! A New York federal court just nailed the NSA for spying on Americans. In a 97-page ruling, the Second Circuit Court ruled that the heart and soul of the so-called Patriot Act, known as Section 215, is constitutionally flawed and it cannot be legally interpreted as allowing mass snooping on the phone calls of U.S. citizens!
The timing of this May 2015 ruling is extremely significant since the Patriot Act is set to expire on June 1, 2015.
This is causing power craving, ultra controlling politicians to have outright panic attacks. Unless they do something very quickly, they will be forced to honor constitutional rule of law. An
20:15
Oral Argument before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Oral Argument before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Oral Argument before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Arthur Shartsis - Oral Argument before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - Constitutional Law Question (July 11, 2014).
330:22
Appellate Court Live from RHS
Appellate Court Live from RHS
Appellate Court Live from RHS
15:00
The Need-to-Knows of Appeals & the Appeals Court
The Need-to-Knows of Appeals & the Appeals Court
The Need-to-Knows of Appeals & the Appeals Court
Judge Terri F. Love of Louisiana 4th Circuit Court of Appeal joins the Louisiana law talk show "John Redmann: Power of Attorney" to discuss the history and b...
9:27
Abrams Verdict: Siegelman Released From Jail
Abrams Verdict: Siegelman Released From Jail
Abrams Verdict: Siegelman Released From Jail
Dan Abrams talks to Artur Davis and Scott Horton about the release of Don Siegelman from prison tonight, and recaps some of his coverage on the story. Now wi...
4:19
David Allen - Appellate Court Considers Unemployment Compensation Claim
David Allen - Appellate Court Considers Unemployment Compensation Claim
David Allen - Appellate Court Considers Unemployment Compensation Claim
Dorsey Stern worked as a dental assistant in Missouri. Following a series of heated exchanges with her employer she was no longer employed. She argued she wa...
3:09
Supreme court upholds appellate court decision in favour of teachers' 50-60% pay hike
Supreme court upholds appellate court decision in favour of teachers' 50-60% pay hike
Supreme court upholds appellate court decision in favour of teachers' 50-60% pay hike
Thousands of teachers in public primary and secondary schools will be resting easy after the Supreme court upheld the decisions of the court of appeal compelling the government to pay a 50-60 percent pay rise, until its petition challenging the increment is heard and determined. In their ruling, the Supreme court judges declined to grant a request by the Teachers Service Commission seeking to suspend the court of appeal order saying the highest court in the land had no jurisdiction to hear the case.
2:06
Appellate Court Upholds Suspension Of 8 Security Law Clauses
Appellate Court Upholds Suspension Of 8 Security Law Clauses
Appellate Court Upholds Suspension Of 8 Security Law Clauses
Attorney General Githu Muigai has lost an application seeking to stop the suspension of eight clauses of the Security Laws Amendment Act. Three appellate judges ruled that the AG did not sufficiently demonstrate how temporary suspension of the laws would jeopardize the fight against terrorism. The 8 clauses will now remain suspended until the case filed by the Coalition for Reforms and Democracy is heard and determined.
0:40
Appellate Court Hears Okla. Gay Marriage Case
Appellate Court Hears Okla. Gay Marriage Case
Appellate Court Hears Okla. Gay Marriage Case
A three-judge appellate panel in Denver heard oral arguments in a lawsuit that seeks to overturn Oklahoma's ban on same-sex marriage. Oklahoma voters overwhe...
The embattled Embu Governor Martin Wambora has inched closer to regaining his full mandate as the governor, after the court of appeal sitting in Nyeri upheld his appeal challenging a section of the ruling made at the Kerugoya high court on April 16 this year. Appellate judges Justice Alnassir Visram, Otieno Odek and Lady Justice Martha Koome said that the high court judges had failed to exercise their supervisory jurisdiction to determine whether the threshold set by the constitution was met when Wambora was impeached for the second time by the Embu county assembly. The ruling by the judges means that Wambora has only one case remaining in th
1:36
Not Yet Teachers! TSC to challenge award to teachers in Appellate court
Not Yet Teachers! TSC to challenge award to teachers in Appellate court
Not Yet Teachers! TSC to challenge award to teachers in Appellate court
Just a day after a landmark ruling over teachers’ pay increase TSC has vowed to appeal the decision. Trevor Ombija was in studio with the details. TSC insists that the pay increase can only be awarded after a job evaluation, remember Justice Ndumba Nderi in his ruling stated that the evaluation falls under the TSC and not SRC….Take a look....
For more news visit http://www.ntv.co.ke
Follow us on Twitter http://www.twitter.com/ntvkenya
Like our FaceBook page http://www.facebook.com/NtvKenya
11 court of appeal and high court judges who had been found unsuitable to serve by the judges and magistrate vetting board are finally on their way home after the supreme court overturned a ruling by the court of appeal stopping their removal from office and upheld their dismissal. Wednesday's ruling will be a major victory for the Sharad Rao led judges and magistrates vetting board which had voiced concern over the continued stay in office of the dismissed judges even after they had been found unfit to continue in service.
62:09
Fox Television v. Federal Communications Commission 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals 2006
Fox Television v. Federal Communications Commission 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals 2006
Fox Television v. Federal Communications Commission 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals 2006
This is an indecency trial and this video has been marked "L Strong Language" using the YouTube rating system. There is an audio warning, a visual warning, a...
63:30
NALC 2014 Appellate Moot Court Final Round
NALC 2014 Appellate Moot Court Final Round
NALC 2014 Appellate Moot Court Final Round
NALC, is an inter-law school competition presented by the Center for Animal Law Studies at Lewis & Clark. NALC provides law students from across the United S...
People v. Abney: Oral Argument in N.Y. Court of Appeals - Part 1
The end of the first trial is not necessarily the end of the case. Our courts system allow the losing side to appeal the decision and if it believes that the earlier court made a mistake. In...
The end of the first trial is not necessarily the end of the case. Our courts system allow the losing side to appeal the decision and if it believes that the earlier court made a mistake. In...
An appellate court, commonly called an appeals court or court of appeals (American English) or appeal court (British English) or court of second instance or second instance court, is any court of law that is empowered to hear an appeal of a trial court or other lower tribunal. In most jurisdictions, the court system is divided into at least three levels: the trial court, which initially hears cases and reviews evidence and testimony to determine the facts of the case; at least one intermediate appellate court; and a supreme court (or court of last resort) which primarily reviews the decisions of the intermediate courts. A jurisdiction's supreme court is that jurisdiction's highest appellate court. Appellate courts nationwide can operate by varying rules.
The authority of appellate courts to review decisions of lower courts varies widely from one jurisdiction to another. In some places, the appellate court has limited powers of review. "Generally speaking, an appellate court's judgment provides 'the final directive of the appeals courts as to the matter appealed, setting out with specificity the court's determination that the action appealed from should be affirmed, reversed, remanded or modified'".
This video is targeted to blind users.
Attribution:
Article text available under CC-BY-SA
Creative Commons image source in video
An appellate court, commonly called an appeals court or court of appeals (American English) or appeal court (British English) or court of second instance or second instance court, is any court of law that is empowered to hear an appeal of a trial court or other lower tribunal. In most jurisdictions, the court system is divided into at least three levels: the trial court, which initially hears cases and reviews evidence and testimony to determine the facts of the case; at least one intermediate appellate court; and a supreme court (or court of last resort) which primarily reviews the decisions of the intermediate courts. A jurisdiction's supreme court is that jurisdiction's highest appellate court. Appellate courts nationwide can operate by varying rules.
The authority of appellate courts to review decisions of lower courts varies widely from one jurisdiction to another. In some places, the appellate court has limited powers of review. "Generally speaking, an appellate court's judgment provides 'the final directive of the appeals courts as to the matter appealed, setting out with specificity the court's determination that the action appealed from should be affirmed, reversed, remanded or modified'".
This video is targeted to blind users.
Attribution:
Article text available under CC-BY-SA
Creative Commons image source in video
All about Appellate court. This is another Text 2 Audio transformation using Flite. Below is the transcript for the recording: An appellate court, commonly c...
All about Appellate court. This is another Text 2 Audio transformation using Flite. Below is the transcript for the recording: An appellate court, commonly c...
A federal appellate court ruled Thursday the NSA overstepped its boundaries in its practice of collecting Americans' phone metadata.
Follow Elizabeth Hagedorn: http://www.twitter.com/ElizHagedorn
See more at http://www.newsy.com
Sources:
2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/NSA_ca2_20150507.pdf
Electronic Frontier Foundation https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/03/white-house-confirms-if-section-215-expires-so-does-bulk-phone-records-collection
CNN http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/27/justice/nsa-ruling/
American Civil Liberties Union https://www.aclu.org/nsa-documents-search
Image via: Getty Images / Win McNamee
Script:
The National Security Agency's practice of collecting Americans' information from telephone calls is illegal, according to a court ruling Thursday.
A federal court ruled, "The telephone metadata program exceeds the scope of what Congress has authorized and therefore violates Section 215."
The NSA uses Section 215 of the Patriot Act to justify its collection of Americans' phone metadata. Thursday's court ruling determined the NSA went too far with its information collection.
The timing of the ruling is especially crucial as the Patriot Act is set to expire June 1, unless Congress acts. If it does expire, NSA officials said they would not collect phone metadata unless it was renewed.
This appellate federal court ruling comes after a December 2013 ruling from a judge who decided the NSA's metadata collection was legal.
The lawsuit was brought on by the American Civil Liberties Union. Listed defendants include Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, NSA Director Michael Rogers, Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, new Attorney General Loretta Lynch and FBI Director James Comey.
A federal appellate court ruled Thursday the NSA overstepped its boundaries in its practice of collecting Americans' phone metadata.
Follow Elizabeth Hagedorn: http://www.twitter.com/ElizHagedorn
See more at http://www.newsy.com
Sources:
2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/NSA_ca2_20150507.pdf
Electronic Frontier Foundation https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/03/white-house-confirms-if-section-215-expires-so-does-bulk-phone-records-collection
CNN http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/27/justice/nsa-ruling/
American Civil Liberties Union https://www.aclu.org/nsa-documents-search
Image via: Getty Images / Win McNamee
Script:
The National Security Agency's practice of collecting Americans' information from telephone calls is illegal, according to a court ruling Thursday.
A federal court ruled, "The telephone metadata program exceeds the scope of what Congress has authorized and therefore violates Section 215."
The NSA uses Section 215 of the Patriot Act to justify its collection of Americans' phone metadata. Thursday's court ruling determined the NSA went too far with its information collection.
The timing of the ruling is especially crucial as the Patriot Act is set to expire June 1, unless Congress acts. If it does expire, NSA officials said they would not collect phone metadata unless it was renewed.
This appellate federal court ruling comes after a December 2013 ruling from a judge who decided the NSA's metadata collection was legal.
The lawsuit was brought on by the American Civil Liberties Union. Listed defendants include Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, NSA Director Michael Rogers, Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, new Attorney General Loretta Lynch and FBI Director James Comey.
Mayday, Mayday! A New York federal court just nailed the NSA for spying on Americans. In a 97-page ruling, the Second Circuit Court ruled that the heart and soul of the so-called Patriot Act, known as Section 215, is constitutionally flawed and it cannot be legally interpreted as allowing mass snooping on the phone calls of U.S. citizens!
The timing of this May 2015 ruling is extremely significant since the Patriot Act is set to expire on June 1, 2015.
This is causing power craving, ultra controlling politicians to have outright panic attacks. Unless they do something very quickly, they will be forced to honor constitutional rule of law. And, gasp, people can have private conversations again in America!
But don't jump for joy yet. The political scoundrels have regrouped and are now pushing for a so-called reform measure called the Freedom Act. Only one problem. It's worse than the Patriot Act. The so-called Freedom Act, if implemented, would, as Judge Napolitano put it, "legitimize all spying all the time on all of us in ways that the Patriot Act fails to do. It is no protection of privacy; it is no protection of constitutional liberty. It unleashes American spies on innocent Americans in utter disregard of the Fourth Amendment."
Ironically, the NSA's data collection center is located in the town of Bluffdale, Utah. So what do you say it's time to call everyone's bluff. Let' s make it an acid test of who to support this election season. Even if a professing conservative supports either renewing the Patriot Act or the new phony Freedom Act, show him the Right Foot of Fellowship--and that includes Ted Cruz. Et Tu, Ted? Et Tu Ted. As admirable as Senator Cruz is on many issues, if he is on the wrong side of this issue, he can't be trusted on lesser issues. Hopefully the unwavering stand of Ted's buddy Rand Paul will motivate Cruz to abandon his current inexplicable support for the Freedom Act, and to once again stand firm in supporting our Fourth Amendment rights.
Judge Andrew Napolitano's repudiation of the Patriot Act in his May 14 column is constitutionally unassailable. He wrote, "The Patriot Act is the centerpiece of the federal government’s false claims that by surrendering our personal liberties to it, it can somehow keep us safe. The liberty-for-safety offer has been around for millennia and was poignant at the time of the founding of the American republic.
"The Framers addressed it in the Constitution itself, where they recognized the primacy of the right to privacy and insured against its violation by the government by intentionally forcing it to jump through some difficult hoops before it can capture our thoughts, words or private behavior.
"Those hoops are the requirement of a search warrant issued by a judge and based on evidence — called probable cause — demonstrating that it is more likely than not that the government will find what it is looking for from the person or place it is targeting. Only then may a judge issue a warrant, which must specifically describe the place to be searched or specifically identify the person or thing to be seized.
"None of this is new. It has been at the core of our system of government since the 1790s. It is embodied in the Fourth Amendment, which is at the heart of the Bill of Rights. It is quintessentially American."
Wow! If we can only get our politicians to embrace constitutional chat like this, we might just get back our Constitutional Republic!
Napolitano went on the explain that The Patriot Act makes an unconstitutional end run around the search warrant requirement by employing language left intentionally vague so that the feds can interpret it any way it wants and to add insult to injury they used a secret court called a FISA court to legitimize their illegitimate actions, far from the prying and probing eyes of We the People and what's left of the Free Press, resulting in their ability to spy on anyone and everyone whenever they choose--and they chose to spy on everyone all the time--including having the Draconian ability to actually turn on our cell phones remotely, using them as listening devices--in real time!
This is the end of our video but if you still are leaning toward replacing the Patriot Act with the Freedom Act, consider this: The NSA supports the Freedom Act!
To read Judge Napolitano's column on this subject, visit the web page of LewRockwell.com.
Mayday, Mayday! A New York federal court just nailed the NSA for spying on Americans. In a 97-page ruling, the Second Circuit Court ruled that the heart and soul of the so-called Patriot Act, known as Section 215, is constitutionally flawed and it cannot be legally interpreted as allowing mass snooping on the phone calls of U.S. citizens!
The timing of this May 2015 ruling is extremely significant since the Patriot Act is set to expire on June 1, 2015.
This is causing power craving, ultra controlling politicians to have outright panic attacks. Unless they do something very quickly, they will be forced to honor constitutional rule of law. And, gasp, people can have private conversations again in America!
But don't jump for joy yet. The political scoundrels have regrouped and are now pushing for a so-called reform measure called the Freedom Act. Only one problem. It's worse than the Patriot Act. The so-called Freedom Act, if implemented, would, as Judge Napolitano put it, "legitimize all spying all the time on all of us in ways that the Patriot Act fails to do. It is no protection of privacy; it is no protection of constitutional liberty. It unleashes American spies on innocent Americans in utter disregard of the Fourth Amendment."
Ironically, the NSA's data collection center is located in the town of Bluffdale, Utah. So what do you say it's time to call everyone's bluff. Let' s make it an acid test of who to support this election season. Even if a professing conservative supports either renewing the Patriot Act or the new phony Freedom Act, show him the Right Foot of Fellowship--and that includes Ted Cruz. Et Tu, Ted? Et Tu Ted. As admirable as Senator Cruz is on many issues, if he is on the wrong side of this issue, he can't be trusted on lesser issues. Hopefully the unwavering stand of Ted's buddy Rand Paul will motivate Cruz to abandon his current inexplicable support for the Freedom Act, and to once again stand firm in supporting our Fourth Amendment rights.
Judge Andrew Napolitano's repudiation of the Patriot Act in his May 14 column is constitutionally unassailable. He wrote, "The Patriot Act is the centerpiece of the federal government’s false claims that by surrendering our personal liberties to it, it can somehow keep us safe. The liberty-for-safety offer has been around for millennia and was poignant at the time of the founding of the American republic.
"The Framers addressed it in the Constitution itself, where they recognized the primacy of the right to privacy and insured against its violation by the government by intentionally forcing it to jump through some difficult hoops before it can capture our thoughts, words or private behavior.
"Those hoops are the requirement of a search warrant issued by a judge and based on evidence — called probable cause — demonstrating that it is more likely than not that the government will find what it is looking for from the person or place it is targeting. Only then may a judge issue a warrant, which must specifically describe the place to be searched or specifically identify the person or thing to be seized.
"None of this is new. It has been at the core of our system of government since the 1790s. It is embodied in the Fourth Amendment, which is at the heart of the Bill of Rights. It is quintessentially American."
Wow! If we can only get our politicians to embrace constitutional chat like this, we might just get back our Constitutional Republic!
Napolitano went on the explain that The Patriot Act makes an unconstitutional end run around the search warrant requirement by employing language left intentionally vague so that the feds can interpret it any way it wants and to add insult to injury they used a secret court called a FISA court to legitimize their illegitimate actions, far from the prying and probing eyes of We the People and what's left of the Free Press, resulting in their ability to spy on anyone and everyone whenever they choose--and they chose to spy on everyone all the time--including having the Draconian ability to actually turn on our cell phones remotely, using them as listening devices--in real time!
This is the end of our video but if you still are leaning toward replacing the Patriot Act with the Freedom Act, consider this: The NSA supports the Freedom Act!
To read Judge Napolitano's column on this subject, visit the web page of LewRockwell.com.
published:15 May 2015
views:26
Oral Argument before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Judge Terri F. Love of Louisiana 4th Circuit Court of Appeal joins the Louisiana law talk show "John Redmann: Power of Attorney" to discuss the history and b...
Judge Terri F. Love of Louisiana 4th Circuit Court of Appeal joins the Louisiana law talk show "John Redmann: Power of Attorney" to discuss the history and b...
Dan Abrams talks to Artur Davis and Scott Horton about the release of Don Siegelman from prison tonight, and recaps some of his coverage on the story. Now wi...
Dan Abrams talks to Artur Davis and Scott Horton about the release of Don Siegelman from prison tonight, and recaps some of his coverage on the story. Now wi...
Dorsey Stern worked as a dental assistant in Missouri. Following a series of heated exchanges with her employer she was no longer employed. She argued she wa...
Dorsey Stern worked as a dental assistant in Missouri. Following a series of heated exchanges with her employer she was no longer employed. She argued she wa...
Thousands of teachers in public primary and secondary schools will be resting easy after the Supreme court upheld the decisions of the court of appeal compelling the government to pay a 50-60 percent pay rise, until its petition challenging the increment is heard and determined. In their ruling, the Supreme court judges declined to grant a request by the Teachers Service Commission seeking to suspend the court of appeal order saying the highest court in the land had no jurisdiction to hear the case.
Thousands of teachers in public primary and secondary schools will be resting easy after the Supreme court upheld the decisions of the court of appeal compelling the government to pay a 50-60 percent pay rise, until its petition challenging the increment is heard and determined. In their ruling, the Supreme court judges declined to grant a request by the Teachers Service Commission seeking to suspend the court of appeal order saying the highest court in the land had no jurisdiction to hear the case.
published:24 Aug 2015
views:83
Appellate Court Upholds Suspension Of 8 Security Law Clauses
Attorney General Githu Muigai has lost an application seeking to stop the suspension of eight clauses of the Security Laws Amendment Act. Three appellate judges ruled that the AG did not sufficiently demonstrate how temporary suspension of the laws would jeopardize the fight against terrorism. The 8 clauses will now remain suspended until the case filed by the Coalition for Reforms and Democracy is heard and determined.
Attorney General Githu Muigai has lost an application seeking to stop the suspension of eight clauses of the Security Laws Amendment Act. Three appellate judges ruled that the AG did not sufficiently demonstrate how temporary suspension of the laws would jeopardize the fight against terrorism. The 8 clauses will now remain suspended until the case filed by the Coalition for Reforms and Democracy is heard and determined.
A three-judge appellate panel in Denver heard oral arguments in a lawsuit that seeks to overturn Oklahoma's ban on same-sex marriage. Oklahoma voters overwhe...
A three-judge appellate panel in Denver heard oral arguments in a lawsuit that seeks to overturn Oklahoma's ban on same-sex marriage. Oklahoma voters overwhe...
The embattled Embu Governor Martin Wambora has inched closer to regaining his full mandate as the governor, after the court of appeal sitting in Nyeri upheld his appeal challenging a section of the ruling made at the Kerugoya high court on April 16 this year. Appellate judges Justice Alnassir Visram, Otieno Odek and Lady Justice Martha Koome said that the high court judges had failed to exercise their supervisory jurisdiction to determine whether the threshold set by the constitution was met when Wambora was impeached for the second time by the Embu county assembly. The ruling by the judges means that Wambora has only one case remaining in the High court in Nairobi challenging his ouster. This, as the court of appeal found that the Embu county assembly speaker Justus Kariuki Mate and his clerk Jimmy Kauma were in contempt of court for ignoring a validly issued court order.
The embattled Embu Governor Martin Wambora has inched closer to regaining his full mandate as the governor, after the court of appeal sitting in Nyeri upheld his appeal challenging a section of the ruling made at the Kerugoya high court on April 16 this year. Appellate judges Justice Alnassir Visram, Otieno Odek and Lady Justice Martha Koome said that the high court judges had failed to exercise their supervisory jurisdiction to determine whether the threshold set by the constitution was met when Wambora was impeached for the second time by the Embu county assembly. The ruling by the judges means that Wambora has only one case remaining in the High court in Nairobi challenging his ouster. This, as the court of appeal found that the Embu county assembly speaker Justus Kariuki Mate and his clerk Jimmy Kauma were in contempt of court for ignoring a validly issued court order.
published:30 Sep 2014
views:62
Not Yet Teachers! TSC to challenge award to teachers in Appellate court
Just a day after a landmark ruling over teachers’ pay increase TSC has vowed to appeal the decision. Trevor Ombija was in studio with the details. TSC insists that the pay increase can only be awarded after a job evaluation, remember Justice Ndumba Nderi in his ruling stated that the evaluation falls under the TSC and not SRC….Take a look....
For more news visit http://www.ntv.co.ke
Follow us on Twitter http://www.twitter.com/ntvkenya
Like our FaceBook page http://www.facebook.com/NtvKenya
Just a day after a landmark ruling over teachers’ pay increase TSC has vowed to appeal the decision. Trevor Ombija was in studio with the details. TSC insists that the pay increase can only be awarded after a job evaluation, remember Justice Ndumba Nderi in his ruling stated that the evaluation falls under the TSC and not SRC….Take a look....
For more news visit http://www.ntv.co.ke
Follow us on Twitter http://www.twitter.com/ntvkenya
Like our FaceBook page http://www.facebook.com/NtvKenya
11 court of appeal and high court judges who had been found unsuitable to serve by the judges and magistrate vetting board are finally on their way home after the supreme court overturned a ruling by the court of appeal stopping their removal from office and upheld their dismissal. Wednesday's ruling will be a major victory for the Sharad Rao led judges and magistrates vetting board which had voiced concern over the continued stay in office of the dismissed judges even after they had been found unfit to continue in service.
11 court of appeal and high court judges who had been found unsuitable to serve by the judges and magistrate vetting board are finally on their way home after the supreme court overturned a ruling by the court of appeal stopping their removal from office and upheld their dismissal. Wednesday's ruling will be a major victory for the Sharad Rao led judges and magistrates vetting board which had voiced concern over the continued stay in office of the dismissed judges even after they had been found unfit to continue in service.
published:05 Nov 2014
views:196
Fox Television v. Federal Communications Commission 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals 2006
This is an indecency trial and this video has been marked "L Strong Language" using the YouTube rating system. There is an audio warning, a visual warning, a...
This is an indecency trial and this video has been marked "L Strong Language" using the YouTube rating system. There is an audio warning, a visual warning, a...
NALC, is an inter-law school competition presented by the Center for Animal Law Studies at Lewis & Clark. NALC provides law students from across the United S...
NALC, is an inter-law school competition presented by the Center for Animal Law Studies at Lewis & Clark. NALC provides law students from across the United S...
The end of the first trial is not necessarily the end of the case. Our courts system allow the losing side to appeal the decision and if it believes that the earlier court made a mistake. In...
4:33
Appellate court
An appellate court, commonly called an appeals court or court of appeals (American English...
published:04 Nov 2014
Appellate court
Appellate court
published:04 Nov 2014
views:2
An appellate court, commonly called an appeals court or court of appeals (American English) or appeal court (British English) or court of second instance or second instance court, is any court of law that is empowered to hear an appeal of a trial court or other lower tribunal. In most jurisdictions, the court system is divided into at least three levels: the trial court, which initially hears cases and reviews evidence and testimony to determine the facts of the case; at least one intermediate appellate court; and a supreme court (or court of last resort) which primarily reviews the decisions of the intermediate courts. A jurisdiction's supreme court is that jurisdiction's highest appellate court. Appellate courts nationwide can operate by varying rules.
The authority of appellate courts to review decisions of lower courts varies widely from one jurisdiction to another. In some places, the appellate court has limited powers of review. "Generally speaking, an appellate court's judgment provides 'the final directive of the appeals courts as to the matter appealed, setting out with specificity the court's determination that the action appealed from should be affirmed, reversed, remanded or modified'".
This video is targeted to blind users.
Attribution:
Article text available under CC-BY-SA
Creative Commons image source in video
1:06
Appellate court
All about Appellate court. This is another Text 2 Audio transformation using Flite. Below ...
All about Appellate court. This is another Text 2 Audio transformation using Flite. Below is the transcript for the recording: An appellate court, commonly c...
1:36
The Difference in How an Appellate Court Views the Case
Appellate Court Rules NSA's Phone Data Collection Is Illegal
A federal appellate court ruled Thursday the NSA overstepped its boundaries in its practic...
published:07 May 2015
Appellate Court Rules NSA's Phone Data Collection Is Illegal
Appellate Court Rules NSA's Phone Data Collection Is Illegal
published:07 May 2015
views:3680
A federal appellate court ruled Thursday the NSA overstepped its boundaries in its practice of collecting Americans' phone metadata.
Follow Elizabeth Hagedorn: http://www.twitter.com/ElizHagedorn
See more at http://www.newsy.com
Sources:
2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/NSA_ca2_20150507.pdf
Electronic Frontier Foundation https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/03/white-house-confirms-if-section-215-expires-so-does-bulk-phone-records-collection
CNN http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/27/justice/nsa-ruling/
American Civil Liberties Union https://www.aclu.org/nsa-documents-search
Image via: Getty Images / Win McNamee
Script:
The National Security Agency's practice of collecting Americans' information from telephone calls is illegal, according to a court ruling Thursday.
A federal court ruled, "The telephone metadata program exceeds the scope of what Congress has authorized and therefore violates Section 215."
The NSA uses Section 215 of the Patriot Act to justify its collection of Americans' phone metadata. Thursday's court ruling determined the NSA went too far with its information collection.
The timing of the ruling is especially crucial as the Patriot Act is set to expire June 1, unless Congress acts. If it does expire, NSA officials said they would not collect phone metadata unless it was renewed.
This appellate federal court ruling comes after a December 2013 ruling from a judge who decided the NSA's metadata collection was legal.
The lawsuit was brought on by the American Civil Liberties Union. Listed defendants include Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, NSA Director Michael Rogers, Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, new Attorney General Loretta Lynch and FBI Director James Comey.
15:52
2008 Davis Moot Court Winning Oral Argument
Victoria Corder won the 2008 John W. Davis Appellate Advocacy Competition....
Victoria Corder won the 2008 John W. Davis Appellate Advocacy Competition.
5:11
Appellate Court Nails NSA Spying and Patriot Act
Mayday, Mayday! A New York federal court just nailed the NSA for spying on Americans. In a...
published:15 May 2015
Appellate Court Nails NSA Spying and Patriot Act
Appellate Court Nails NSA Spying and Patriot Act
published:15 May 2015
views:26
Mayday, Mayday! A New York federal court just nailed the NSA for spying on Americans. In a 97-page ruling, the Second Circuit Court ruled that the heart and soul of the so-called Patriot Act, known as Section 215, is constitutionally flawed and it cannot be legally interpreted as allowing mass snooping on the phone calls of U.S. citizens!
The timing of this May 2015 ruling is extremely significant since the Patriot Act is set to expire on June 1, 2015.
This is causing power craving, ultra controlling politicians to have outright panic attacks. Unless they do something very quickly, they will be forced to honor constitutional rule of law. And, gasp, people can have private conversations again in America!
But don't jump for joy yet. The political scoundrels have regrouped and are now pushing for a so-called reform measure called the Freedom Act. Only one problem. It's worse than the Patriot Act. The so-called Freedom Act, if implemented, would, as Judge Napolitano put it, "legitimize all spying all the time on all of us in ways that the Patriot Act fails to do. It is no protection of privacy; it is no protection of constitutional liberty. It unleashes American spies on innocent Americans in utter disregard of the Fourth Amendment."
Ironically, the NSA's data collection center is located in the town of Bluffdale, Utah. So what do you say it's time to call everyone's bluff. Let' s make it an acid test of who to support this election season. Even if a professing conservative supports either renewing the Patriot Act or the new phony Freedom Act, show him the Right Foot of Fellowship--and that includes Ted Cruz. Et Tu, Ted? Et Tu Ted. As admirable as Senator Cruz is on many issues, if he is on the wrong side of this issue, he can't be trusted on lesser issues. Hopefully the unwavering stand of Ted's buddy Rand Paul will motivate Cruz to abandon his current inexplicable support for the Freedom Act, and to once again stand firm in supporting our Fourth Amendment rights.
Judge Andrew Napolitano's repudiation of the Patriot Act in his May 14 column is constitutionally unassailable. He wrote, "The Patriot Act is the centerpiece of the federal government’s false claims that by surrendering our personal liberties to it, it can somehow keep us safe. The liberty-for-safety offer has been around for millennia and was poignant at the time of the founding of the American republic.
"The Framers addressed it in the Constitution itself, where they recognized the primacy of the right to privacy and insured against its violation by the government by intentionally forcing it to jump through some difficult hoops before it can capture our thoughts, words or private behavior.
"Those hoops are the requirement of a search warrant issued by a judge and based on evidence — called probable cause — demonstrating that it is more likely than not that the government will find what it is looking for from the person or place it is targeting. Only then may a judge issue a warrant, which must specifically describe the place to be searched or specifically identify the person or thing to be seized.
"None of this is new. It has been at the core of our system of government since the 1790s. It is embodied in the Fourth Amendment, which is at the heart of the Bill of Rights. It is quintessentially American."
Wow! If we can only get our politicians to embrace constitutional chat like this, we might just get back our Constitutional Republic!
Napolitano went on the explain that The Patriot Act makes an unconstitutional end run around the search warrant requirement by employing language left intentionally vague so that the feds can interpret it any way it wants and to add insult to injury they used a secret court called a FISA court to legitimize their illegitimate actions, far from the prying and probing eyes of We the People and what's left of the Free Press, resulting in their ability to spy on anyone and everyone whenever they choose--and they chose to spy on everyone all the time--including having the Draconian ability to actually turn on our cell phones remotely, using them as listening devices--in real time!
This is the end of our video but if you still are leaning toward replacing the Patriot Act with the Freedom Act, consider this: The NSA supports the Freedom Act!
To read Judge Napolitano's column on this subject, visit the web page of LewRockwell.com.
20:15
Oral Argument before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Arthur Shartsis - Oral Argument before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Ci...
Judge Terri F. Love of Louisiana 4th Circuit Court of Appeal joins the Louisiana law talk show "John Redmann: Power of Attorney" to discuss the history and b...
9:27
Abrams Verdict: Siegelman Released From Jail
Dan Abrams talks to Artur Davis and Scott Horton about the release of Don Siegelman from p...
Dan Abrams talks to Artur Davis and Scott Horton about the release of Don Siegelman from prison tonight, and recaps some of his coverage on the story. Now wi...
The Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (ISIL) have destroyed the nearly 2,000-year-old Arch of Triumph in the ancient city of Palmyra, Syria's head of antiquities and activists have said. The arch was one of the most recognisable sites in Palmyra, the central city affectionately known by Syrians as the "Bride of the Desert," which ISIL seized in May ... "This is a systematic destruction of the city. They want to raze it completely ... Source ... ....
(CNN)This is the kind of deluge that might happen only once every 1,000 years. South Carolina is grappling with a historic flooding that has led to several deaths, shut down interstates and sent search crews scrambling to rescue those trapped by rising waters. "This is an incident we've never dealt with before," Gov. Nikki Haley said ... "We are at a 1,000-year level of rain," the governor said. "That's how big this is.". 21 photos ... 21 photos....
PresidentBashar al-Assad said the success of a military campaign by Russia, Syria and its allies was vital to save the Middle East from destruction, a day after Moscow said it would step up air strikes against Islamic State targets across Syria ... “It must succeed, otherwise we face the destruction of the entire region and not only one or two states,” he said in an interview with Iranian television broadcast on Sunday ... Rival insurgents....
WASHINGTON (AP) — Set 'em up, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and lend an ear to the troubles of a presidential candidate. The front-runner for the Democratic nomination appeared on the season opener of "Saturday Night Live" as a wise bartender named Val who pours a drink or two for, ahem, Hillary Clinton (played by "SNL" regular Kate McKinnon) ... "So, Hillary," Clinton asks McKinnon, "what brings you here tonight?" ... . ... ....
The 23rd general assembly of Sajha Prakashan scheduled for October 3 was cancelled after the Patan AppellateCourt issued a stay order. Stating that the appointments in Sajha Prakashan Management Committee were made illegally, NationalCooperativeDevelopmentBoard had last week filed a writ petition at the AppellateCourt seeking stay order against the publication house’s decision to hold its general assembly....
"And what the court is saying is that interpretation doesn't extend to unintentional takes." ... The nation's appellatecourts have starkly different interpretations of the law, resulting in an uneven enforcement across the country, with companies in some energy-rich states facing a narrower liability toward migratory birds than operations in other regions ...SupremeCourt, service spokeswoman Laury Parramore said....
SuperiorCourtJudgeSandra Lopez more than shattered the glass ceiling when she was appointed to the bench this year. She is the first woman, and the first Hispanic, ever to serve in state Superior Court in Salem County...New Jersey has 418 Superior Court judges - and 148 of them, roughly one-third, are women ... There are three Latinoappellatecourt judges out of 33, and Justice Faustino J....
This November we have the opportunity to vote for judges ranging from local magisterial district judges to county common pleas judges to the state appellatecourts... The SuperiorCourt is often called "the people's appellatecourt" because its appellate jurisdiction goes directly to things that impact our daily lives, from personal safety (criminal law) to wills and estates to family law....
A court at less than full capacity is truly not being the most efficient for residents ... For example the appellate division is appointed exclusively at the hands of the chief justice, and that’s a hell of a lot of authority and power to basically be able to hand pick all the people who are going to be the intermediate appellatecourts, I mean he can basically shape it to be the perspective of one guy....
SupremeCourtJustice Weighs In On Kathleen KaneSaga Pa. Supreme Court Justice Weighs In On Kathleen Kane Saga ... Of the 15 commissioned judges on the SuperiorCourt, only five are Democrats. ... In other words, the GOP-dominated appellatecourts could swerve further to the right and Democrats could disappear completely from CommonwealthCourt within a year if Democrats do not perform very well this November....
WolfHaldenstein has extensive experience in the prosecution of securities class actions and derivative litigation in state and federal trial and appellatecourts across the country. The firm has attorneys in various practice areas; and offices in New York, Chicago and San Diego. The reputation and expertise of this firm in shareholder ......
The IndianaCourt of Appeals has upheld an ... But Tuesday's appellatecourt ruling found that Owen's attorney had zealously defended him and the court affirmed his conviction....
The company, whose plans to transport Marcellus Shale natural gas liquids to Marcus Hook have encountered resistance, said the decision is consistent with rulings by other courts and with the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission's determination that MarinerEast is a public utility service ... "I think it will ultimately be decided in the appellatecourt," he said....
Marcus made the principal aware that the mother was flagrantly violating court orders by taking the children from school ... Hopefully, the mother has learned that she must comply with court orders and become a better influence in the children's lives after released from jail ... He has litigated extensively in both State and FederalAppellateCourts, resulting in noteworthy and critical successes....
CountySuperiorCourt ruling that cleared the way for the Clippers to be sold ... In a submission to the appellatecourt, Sterling’s attorneys argued that the order was an “reversible error” that led to a “miscarriage of justice.” ... County Superior Court for publishing the recording of his inflammatory comments about African Americans last year that led to his ouster from the NBA....
SAN DIEGO (AP) — The murder conviction of a felon in the 2010 shooting death of a San Diego police officer has been upheld by an appellatecourt. The Los Angeles Times reports (http.//lat.ms/1ipacPJ) a three-judge panel of the 4th AppellateCourt on Friday upheld the second-degree murder conviction.... ....