Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(58)
The contention that the statutes in question are repugnant to the commerce clause of the Constitution is manifestly without merit.
The Supreme Court declared in 1948 that the statutes violated the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech, prompting a passionate dissent from Justice Felix Frankfurter.
A judge dismissed the case, noting, with some chagrin, that the statutes applied only to "motor vehicles," and not those under horse - or human - power, like bicycles.
The Supreme Court reversed a lower court decision and held that the statutes were a reasonable exercise of the state's broad police power.
It follows that the statutes of Texas do not deprive the oil company of its property without due process of law.
For present purposes it is enough to point out that the statutes by no means covered the entire range of intangibles which may become collateral in financing arrangements.
Congress has the power under the clause to decree the effect that the statutes of one state shall have in other states.
A three-judge District Court concluded that the statutes served a sufficiently important state interest to sustain their constitutionality and dismissed the complaints.
The fact that the statutes authorize the libraries to make use, generally of photocopying equipment and procedures, is not controlling or even very significant.
Similar(2)
"To me, that says the statute works," she said.
Judges ought to enforce the bargains reached by the legislature that enacted the statute.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com