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

United States v. Simms

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United States v. Simms
Argued February 17, 1803
Decided February 23, 1803
Full case nameUnited States v. Jesse Simms
Citations5 U.S. 252 (more)
1 Cranch 252; 2 L. Ed. 98; 1803 U.S. LEXIS 358
Case history
PriorWrit of Error to the United States Circuit Court of the District of Columbia
SubsequentAffirmed
Holding
Private rights of action under Virginia law persist in the District of Columbia
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Marshall
Associate Justices
William Cushing · William Paterson
Samuel Chase · Bushrod Washington
Alfred Moore
Case opinion
MajorityMarshall, joined by unanimous
Laws applied
District of Columbia Organic Act of 1801 The Act of the Assembly of Virginia of 19 January 1798 regarding gambling

United States v. Simms, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 252 (1803), was a United States Supreme Court case. It was one of a series of cases dealing with the applicability of previous laws in the newly created District of Columbia.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/3
    Views:
    1 132
    5 017
    753
  • EPA Veteran: Mary Simms
  • "How I Got to College" -Elon Simms
  • Why SIPI? Featuring Demetria Simms

Transcription

[music playing] Mary Simms: I love San Francisco. I am a California girl, born and raised. Working at the EPA in San Francisco is definitely a unique and really interesting experience. Whenever, you know, whatever local issues are in the news, I'd either tell them we're the appropriate source or provide info. Hi, I'm Mary Simms. I'm a press officer with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in San Francisco and I'm an army veteran. Margot Perez-Sullivan: 
I'm proud to say that Mary's one of my closest friends. She's more than just a coworker for me. And I would never know had I not seen the photos that she was a veteran. Jared Blumenfeld: 
Mary's absolutely an integral part of our public affairs team in Region 9. She deals with the Bay area, the press, she's amazing. We do events literally every week and she packs them with all kinds of media from virtual media, to NBC, ABC, and The San Francisco Chronicle. She's really a great member of the team and we're lucky to have her. Bill Keener: 
Well in this past year, there was a really stressful moment for our entire region and Mary was right, literally on the front line of that one because in March of 2011, there was the Japanese earthquake. And then there was the nuclear crisis right after that. And then these reports of this cloud of radiation that was hurtling towards the U.S. West Coast. And Mary was the lead press officer for that whole incident that went on for weeks. Mary had to really work for many hours a day, 12, 14, 16 hours a day, all through the weekends, the weeks, dealing with these queries and trying to get the truth out. Margot Perez-Sullivan: And so these kinds of conditions here are almost a walk in the park. So our type deadlines were a lot of other people in the office might be under a lot of stress. They don't faze Mary. Bill Keener: So the fact that she didn't get rattled, the fact that she was able to be really calm to this and be the voice of reason, was what, I think, went a long way towards reassuring people and calming their fears. Mary Simms: So I think giving it your all and working really hard to make sure that the mission is accomplished is something that I always bring to the table. But also at the end of the day I can take a step back and know that, you know, we aren't on patrol in Afghanistan with the threat of IEDs. But I think at the end of the day, one of the nice things about EPA that I like is that it really affords you a lot of flexibility so that you have flexible work schedules, you have the ability to work from home. Jacob Unger: 
It's nice to finally spend time with my wife, it's good to see that she gets to be part of real world experience at home. It's something that we can plan events together and be together while she's still doing work for our nation. I mean, she's on the inside of a lot of very important things. And I find it exciting; I know she does. Bill Keener:
I view it as serving our country and so I think it's really wonderful to, you know, bring that experience from the military and keep on going in federal service. Mary Simms:
I think service is really what's it's all about in the military. People in the military are willing to make sacrifices to serve their country. And I think their willingness to make those sacrifices is what can make them such an amazing employee because they take a lot of those skill sets and really have it so it's ingrained in them during their service to the military and it can transfer those same attitudes of service to wherever they go next. [music playing]

Background

Prior to the creation of the District of Columbia in 1801, Virginia created a private right of action to enforce most of its criminal statutes. It was illegal in Virginia to operate a billiards parlor, a faro table, or any of a number of other gambling operations from one's house. The law provided that the penalty would be a fine of 150 pounds payable to any party that would file suit against the operator.[1]

When the District of Columbia was formed the acts of Congress that created the district, also created a contradictory legal situation. They held that within the portion of the District of Columbia that had previously been Virginia territory the laws of Virginia would continue to apply. However, it also held that all suits for breach of the peace or other laws within the district must be prosecuted in the name of the United States and that fines would be payable to the United States.[1] This led to a contradiction because the Virginia law, which was supposedly still in force, had no such requirement.

Decision

The Court held that it was the object of Congress not to change in any respect the existing laws further than the new situation of the District rendered indispensably necessary. Thus qui tam remedies enacted before the creation of the District should persist.[1]

See also

Notes and references

  1. ^ a b c United States v. Simms, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 252 (1803).

External links

This page was last edited on 13 September 2023, at 03:21
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.