Unanimous decision for United States majority opinion by James C. McReynolds. 07 2020 <https://cases.lawi.us/united-states-v-lanza/>Encyclopedia of Law: The equivalent to a print encyclopedia with 178 volumes.Kimberly Hassell, 'United States V. Lanza' (cases.lawi.us 2016) <https://cases.lawi.us/united-states-v-lanza/> accesed 2020 July 30This entry about United States V. Lanza has been published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 (CC BY 3.0) licence, which permits unrestricted use and reproduction, provided the author or authors of the United States V. Lanza entry and the Encyclopedia of Law are in each case credited as the source of the United States V. Lanza entry. 560, 569 (13 L. Ed. "If Congress sees fit to bar prosecution by the federal courts for any act when punishment for violation of state prohibition has been imposed, it can, of course, do so by proper legislative provision; but it has not done so. 6, 7, 8, and 9.If Congress sees fit to bar prosecution by the federal courts for any act when punishment for violation of state prohibition has been imposed, it can, of course, do so by proper legislative provision; but it has not done so. 375 (1988) Facts. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON. He said he was expressing his opposition to war. Bartkus. The second section of the amendment, the one declaring 'the Congress and the several states shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation,' does not enable Congress or the several states to defeat or to thwart the prohibition, but only to enforce it by appropriate means. "This is a writ of error by the United States under the Criminal Appeals Act (c. 2564, 34 Stat. 1246), to reverse an order of the District Court for the Western District of Washington dismissing five counts of an indictment presented against the defendants in error April 28, 1920. *378 Mr. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. 727; United States v. Ratagczak (D. C.) 275 Fed.
Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.The Eighteenth Amendment is as follows:authority -- the second section of the amendment -- and therefore that, in principle, it is as if both punishments were in prosecutions by the United States in its courts."8. v. United States, 359 U. S. 187, and it has reinforced that precedent over the following six decades, see, e.g., Puerto Rico. This Court ought to restore the double jeopardy right to its proper constitutional position, holding that as between the United States and Alabama, there is
Supreme Court of United States. 457, 469, 86 L.Ed. Argued November 23, 1922. Each state, as also Congress, may exercise an independent judgment in selecting and shaping measures to enforce prohibition. Argued November 23, 1922. Here the same act was an offense against the state of Washington, because a violation of its law, and also an offense against the United States under the National Prohibition Act.
558. Does the Indian Civil Rights Act (1968) give Indian tribes separate sovereignty to prosecute nonmembers (as opposed to delegating federal power to the tribes for prosecution purposes) such that prosecution in tribal and federal courts for the same crime would not violate the … 535; United States v. Regan (D. C.) 273 Fed. United States v. Holt ( D. C.) 270 Fed. The first section of the amendment, the one embodying the prohibition, is operative throughout the entire territorial limits of the United States, binds all legislative bodies, courts, public officers, and individuals within those limits, and, of its own force, invalidates every legislative act -- whether by Congress, by a state legislature, or by a territorial assembly -- which authorizes or sanctions what the section prohibits.""9. The words 'concurrent power' in that section do not mean joint power, or require that legislation thereunder by Congress, to be effective, shall be approved or sanctioned by the several states or any of them; nor do they mean that the power to enforce is divided between Congress and the several states along the lines which separate or distinguish foreign and interstate commerce from intrastate affairs.""7.