I know the gentleman's concern. It is a common one. It has to do with the deference that Federal courts will give to State court decisions. I believe that is what he is talking about. We will discuss that at some length in our debate on the bill, but the Federal judge always reviews the State court decision to see if it is in conformity with established Supreme Court precedence, or if it has been misapplied. So it is not a blank, total deference, but it is a recognition that you cannot relitigate these issues endlessly.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the deference Federal courts give to State court decisions during a debate on a bill.
Share
More from Henry Hyde
after 7 years of work on anti-narcotic efforts in Colombia, we are now seeing the fruits of our labors in the drug wars. Americans, and especially our young people, are greatly benefiting here at home from our policies in Colombia and the…
this is a killer amendment. If you vote for it, you vote to kill this entire initiative, because this imposes limits on India's nuclear weapons program, but India already possesses nuclear weapons and is extremely unlikely to give them up…
I announce my difficulty in opposing my good friends, Mr. Berman and Mrs. Tauscher. They are both very learned in this field. However, this amendment is very similar to Mr. Sherman's amendment and should be defeated for virtually the same…
the election of Hamas to a majority within the Palestinian Legislative Council and to the formation of a terrorist organization-led government in the Palestinian Authority poses a serious challenge to the United States and its allies. The…





