Word: upheld
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1960-1969
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...pendulum has swung too far in favor of criminals." And to redress the balance, the court may devise more relaxed standards. As the court said in 1960: "What the Constitution forbids is not all searches and seizures, but unreasonable searches and seizures." As an instance, the court in 1963 upheld the right of California police to make an arrest and search after they entered a narcotics peddler's room with a passkey but without a warrant...
Those who yearn to see New York's law upheld avidly quote the court's California decision: "The states are not precluded from developing workable rules to meet the practical demands of effective criminal investigation and law enforcement in the states, provided that the rules do not violate the Constitution's proscription of unreasonable searches and seizures...
...Upheld, in the Senate Rules Committee, the present filibuster rule, which requires the votes of two-thirds of the Senators present and voting to cut off debate. Among the changes unsuccessfully proposed by Senate liberals: reducing the number of Senators needed to invoke cloture to three-fifths of those present and voting...
...court has long protected books and newspapers from "prior restraint" -from any censorship that would affect them before they reach the public. But the court puts movies in a special category because of their graphic nature and "capacity for evil." Thus in 1961, the court narrowly upheld the power of Chicago's police commissioner to precensor all movies and check them for obscenity. That decision, however, failed to answer crucial questions: Are even nonobscene movies subject to precensorship? How long can censors delay decisions and thus make exhibitors knuckle under...
...state censorship board. Freedman did so by refusing to let the censors screen a non-obscene movie: Revenge at Daybreak, a French film about the Irish Rebellion that the board admittedly would have licensed had Freedman submitted it. Freedman was fined $25, and Maryland's highest court upheld the conviction. When Freedman appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, Maryland argued that precensorship of movies is necessary to prevent commercial exploitation of obscenity...