He had criticized almost every major Supreme Court decision expanding civil rights except Brown v. Board of Education.
除了“布朗诉教育委员会案”，他几乎批评了最高法院扩大民权范围的每一项重大裁决。
S. Navy v. Whales. The Court's decision protected the right of naval vessels to test submarine-hunting sonar systems, whose intense sound pulses have been linked to several mass whale strandings.
法院的决定保障了海军舰艇测试潜水艇搜寻声纳系统的权利，强大的声音脉搏已被连接到多个大型鲸鱼搁浅区。
All lasted long enough to be party to the unanimous 1954 decision in Brown v Board of Education that ordered the desegregation of American schools.
四个人留任时间颇长，因此能够参加并在1954年一致决定通过《布朗诉托皮卡教育局案》，该法要求废除美国学校的种族隔离。
The last Supreme Court decision that seems closely analogous to this one was Sony Corp. v. Universal Studios Inc. - which was decided in 1984.
最高法院上一个看起来与此案十分类似的判决是索尼公司诉环球电影公司案—它是在1984年做出的。
[2] Vincent v. Lake Erie Transport was a superb decision, for there the court was careful to investigate the causal agent at work—in this case, the boat, which clearly slammed against the dock.
【注2】文森特诉伊利湖运输公司案是一个极好的判决，因为法院仔细调查了真正的肇因，此案中显然是船猛撞了船坞。
This was the so-called Lochner era, named after the Supreme Court's 1905 decision in Lochner v. New York, striking down a state law setting maximum hours for bakers.
这就是所谓劳克莱时期， 这个名字是根据最高法院1905年在对劳克莱与纽约州的官司中的判决来命名的。 这个判决反对纽约州为面包师设立最多工作时间。
The last straw came in 1941, when the Supreme Court issued its “flash of creative genius” decision, in Cuno Engineering Corporation v. Automatic Devices Corporation.
在1941年，库诺工程公司起诉自动化设备公司一案中，最高法院认定发明是“创意天才的灵光一现”。
Based on the 1967 Katz v. United States Supreme Court decision, this test actually has two parts.
根据1967卡茨诉美国(katzv . U nitedStates)最高法院的判决，该测试实际上包含两部分。
The decision, in United Citizens v Federal Election Commission, overturns decades of restrictions on corporations' campaign spending.
联合公民诉联邦选举委员会案中的这一决定颠覆了数十年来对公司资助竞选的资金限制。
The inspection agency sends the inspection report to Demeter Internationale. V. for assessment. The decision is made by an expert committee, the international certification office.
检查机构会把检查报告发给德米特国际审核，德米特国际认证办公室的专家委员会会作出决定。
In a recent book entitled What Brown v. Board of Education Should Have Said (New York University Press, 2001), leading law professors Shared their versions of the Brown decision.
在最近出版的一本名为《布朗诉教育部案说了什么》(纽约大学出版社，2001年)，一流的法学教授分享了他们对布朗案件判决的观点。
Methods With the decision limit method, the cusum is interpreted against a numerical limit, rather than by use of a V-mask.
方法累积和方法的累积和是根据数字限而不使用V型模板来进行解释。
Brown ended the era of separate-but-equal, whose paradigm was the decision in 1896 of the case called Plessy v.
布朗案结束了一个“分离但是平等”的时代，1896年时有一个案例称作“普莱西起诉富卡松案”Plessy v。
The results show that the method has greater advantages than the generally used decision method based on v…
应用表明，它比通常采用的距离偏离判决方法有明显的优点。
Also, under both Griffin and a U. S. Supreme Court decision in Arizona v.
同样，根据格里芬案以及美国最高法院在Arizonav。
Also, under both Griffin and a U. S. Supreme Court decision in Arizona v.
同样，根据格里芬案以及美国最高法院在Arizonav。
应用推荐