Summary

Samuel Blatchford Farnsworth v. Montana — Opinion of the Court

The view urged is that, in the present case, there is drawn in question the validity of an authority exercised under the United States, on the ground that the statute of Montana, under which the conviction was had, is invalid, and that, as the legislature of Montana, which enacted it, exists under the authority of the United States, the question of the validity of the statute raises the question of the validity of an authority exercised under the United States.
Source: Wikisource

Samuel Blatchford Farnsworth v. Montana — Opinion of the Court

Rep. 570, cited for the plaintiff in error, the jurisdiction of this court was maintained, under the first section of the act of 1885, of an appeal from, and a writ of error to, the supreme court of the District of Columbia, in a case where that court, by its judgment, had dismissed a petition for a writ of prohibition to a court-martial, convened to try an officer for an offense punishable by dismissal from the service, and the deprivation of a salary which, during the term of his office, would exceed the sum of $5,000. A writ of prohibition is a civil remedy, given in a civil action
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature