翻訳と辞書
Words near each other
・ Bond Street Theatre
・ Bond Street tube station
・ Bond strength
・ Bond Swamp National Wildlife Refuge
・ Bond Tender Offer
・ Bond Township, Lawrence County, Illinois
・ Bond University
・ Bond University Bullsharks
・ Bond University Rugby Club
・ Bond v Commonwealth
・ Bond v The Queen
・ Bond v. Floyd
・ Bond v. United States
・ Bond v. United States (2000)
・ Bond v. United States (2011)
Bond v. United States (2014)
・ Bond valence method
・ Bond valuation
・ Bond vigilante
・ Bond Wireless
・ Bond's Chapel Methodist Episcopal Church
・ Bond's Hospital
・ Bond(z)
・ Bond, Colorado
・ Bond, Mississippi
・ Bond, Schoeneck & King
・ Bond, Tennessee
・ Bond-dissociation energy
・ Bond-e Bari
・ Bond-e Bari (1)


Dictionary Lists
翻訳と辞書 辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ]
スポンサード リンク

Bond v. United States (2014) : ウィキペディア英語版
Bond v. United States (2014)

''Bond v. United States'', (2014) is a follow-up to the Supreme Court's 2011 case of the same name. The 2011 case reversed the Third Circuit finding that individuals as well as states can bring a Tenth Amendment challenge to federal law. The case was remanded to the Third Circuit for a decision on the merits, and the Third Circuit found against Bond again. On appeal the Supreme Court reversed and remanded again, ruling that the (Chemical Warfare Act (CWA) ) did not reach Bond's actions, thus she could not be charged under that federal law.
== Background ==
Carol Anne Bond is a microbiologist from Lansdale, Pennsylvania. In 2006 Bond's best friend became pregnant. When Bond discovered that the her husband was the child's father, she attempted to poison her former friend by putting organoarsenic and potassium dichromate on the woman's door knob. Bond was caught and convicted under the CWA. Her appeal argued that applying the chemical weapons treaty to her violated the Tenth Amendment. The Court of Appeals found Bond lacked standing to make a Tenth Amendment claim. On appeal, the Supreme Court reversed, stating that individuals can bring Tenth Amendment claims. The Court then remanded the case for the Third Circuit to decide on the merits.
On remand, the Third Circuit found that "because the Convention is an international agreement with a subject matter that lies at the core of the Treaty Power and because ''Holland'' instructs that 'there can be no dispute about the validity of () statute' that implements a valid treaty, we will affirm Bond's conviction."〔(United States v. Bond, 681 F.3d 149 (3d Cir. 2012) )〕 Bond again appealed to the Supreme Court, asking the court to overrule ''Holland,'' or to alternately find that her actions were not covered by the CWA.
The case attracted a great deal of attention, with U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli arguing for the Government and former General Paul Clement arguing for Bond. Senator Ted Cruz wrote an essay for the Harvard Law Review's blog urging the Court to overturn Bond's conviction.〔(Cruz, Ted. "Limits on the Treaty Power." Harv. L. Rev. F. 127 (2013): 93. )〕

抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)
ウィキペディアで「Bond v. United States (2014)」の詳細全文を読む



スポンサード リンク
翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース

Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.