翻訳と辞書
Words near each other
・ United States v. Pineda-Moreno
・ United States v. Pink
・ United States v. Place
・ United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc.
・ United States v. Price
・ United States v. Progressive, Inc.
・ United States v. Quiver
・ United States v. Rabinowitz
・ United States v. Raines
・ United States v. Ramsey
・ United States v. Ramsey (1926)
・ United States v. Reese
・ United States v. Regenerative Sciences, LLC
・ United States v. Reidel
・ United States v. Reynolds
United States v. Richardson
・ United States v. Riggs
・ United States v. Riverside Bayview
・ United States v. Robel
・ United States v. Robinson
・ United States v. Rodriquez
・ United States v. Rogers
・ United States v. Ross
・ United States v. Russell
・ United States v. Rybar
・ United States v. Salerno
・ United States v. Sandoval
・ United States v. Santa Fe Pacific Railroad Co.
・ United States v. Scheffer
・ United States v. Scheinberg


Dictionary Lists
翻訳と辞書 辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ]
スポンサード リンク

United States v. Richardson : ウィキペディア英語版
United States v. Richardson

''United States v. Richardson'', , was a United States Supreme Court case concerning standing in which the Court held a taxpayer's interest in government spending was generalized, and too "undifferentiated" to confer Article III standing to challenge a law which exempted Central Intelligence Agency funding from Article I, Section 9 requirements that such expenditures be audited and reported to the public.
== Background ==
In 1949, Congress passed the Central Intelligence Agency Act, which exempted funding for the CIA from financial disclosure.
William B. Richardson, an insurance claims adjuster, first attempted to challenge the CIA Act in 1968, in ''Richardson v. Sekel'', 408 F.2d 844 (3rd Cir. 1969), but the case was unsuccessful at District court and the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied certiorari. In 1972, he tried again, filing suit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. Richardson argued that the Act was in violation of the penultimate clause of Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution, which states "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time." The District Court dismissed the case for standing; the Third Circuit, hearing the case ''en banc,'' reversed; in 1973, the Supreme Court granted certiorari.〔(Case Documents as Justia )〕

抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)
ウィキペディアで「United States v. Richardson」の詳細全文を読む



スポンサード リンク
翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース

Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.