To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In re Neagle
Argued March 4–5, 1890
Decided April 14, 1890
Full case nameIn re David Neagle
Citations135 U.S. 1 (more)
10 S. Ct. 658; 34 L. Ed. 55; 1890 U.S. LEXIS 2006
Case history
PriorAppeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of California
Holding
Section 3 of Art. II of the U.S. Constitution requires that the Executive Branch "take care that the laws be faithfully executed." The court determined that the appointment of bodyguards to Supreme Court Justices ensured the faithful execution of the law of the United States. The court also relied on a statute granting marshals "the same powers, in executing the laws of the United States, as sheriffs and their deputies in such State may have, by law, in executing the laws thereof."
Court membership
Chief Justice
Melville Fuller
Associate Justices
Samuel F. Miller · Stephen J. Field
Joseph P. Bradley · John M. Harlan
Horace Gray · Samuel Blatchford
Lucius Q. C. Lamar II · David J. Brewer
Case opinions
MajorityMiller, joined by Bradley, Harlan, Gray, Blatchford, Brewer
DissentLamar, joined by Fuller
Field took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
Laws applied
U.S. Const. Art. III, Sec. 788 of the Revised Statutes of the United States

In re Neagle, 135 U.S. 1 (1890), is a United States Supreme Court decision holding that federal officers are immune from State prosecution when acting within the scope of their federal authority.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/3
    Views:
    2 876
    2 413
    2 681
  • David Neagle: What It Takes To Become a Person of Influence
  • David Neagle Video Series: There Is No Such Thing as Lack
  • David Neagle Video Series: How To Find The Millions Within

Transcription

Facts

Suspecting a plot against US Supreme Court Justice Stephen J. Field's life, in 1889 U.S. Attorney General William Miller instructed US Marshal John Franks to appoint Deputy U.S. Marshal David Neagle (1847–1925) to serve as Justice Field's bodyguard while Field rode circuit in California.

On August 14, 1889, David S. Terry approached Field inside the Lathrop, California train station in California's San Joaquin Valley. Terry, a former California Supreme Court justice, had a long-standing grudge with Field, who had ruled against his wife in a lawsuit and subsequently sentenced both him and his wife to jail on contempt charges. As Terry walked towards the exit to the railroad station dining room, he struck Field from behind with such force that he knocked his glasses off. Terry was known to carry a large Bowie knife. Terry drew back his hand again, and fearing Terry was about to kill Field, Neagle shot and killed him. Field and Neagle were arrested by the San Joaquin Sheriff Thomas Cunningham. Cunningham later released Field on his own recognizance, but took Neagle to jail.[1]

The United States Attorney in San Francisco filed a writ of habeas corpus for Neagle's release. The circuit court issued the writ after a hearing and ordered Neagle's release. Sheriff Cunningham, with the aid of the State of California, appealed to the United States Supreme Court. In a 6-2 decision (Justice Field abstained), the Supreme Court affirmed the lower court.[2] The decision recognized that, as the source of all executive authority, the President could act in the absence of specific statutory authority since there were no laws that provided for protection of federal judges by the executive branch. Constitutionally, the decision determined that the executive branch exercised its own "necessary and proper" authority.

Question before the court

The question for the court to decide, was the state obligated to obey the writ even though no national statute empowered the Attorney General to provide judges with bodyguards?

See also

References

  1. ^ "History - The U.S. Marshals and Court Security". usmarshals.gov. Retrieved March 10, 2017.
  2. ^ "In re Neagle". Oyez.org. Retrieved March 10, 2017.

External links


This page was last edited on 13 September 2023, at 02:25
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.