The court stressed that the decision to withhold evidence is to be made by the presiding judge and not the executive.

The court today explicitly rejected this view and stressed that "as in other professions, an adversarial stance is fully consistent with professional, investigative reporting."

The court also stressed the peculiarity and strictness of the municipal ordinance it was interpreting:

The court stresses the considerable savings in legal fees and time by settling the case utilizing the panel recommendations.

The court investigated the technology in some detail, but stressed that it was not evaluating the experts' decision, just construing the words of the agreement.

In Jacob, the court stressed that it was not.

According to Justice Breyer, the court has "stressed the 'acute need' for reliable decision making when the death penalty is at issue."

The court had stressed on more than one occasion that applications for direct access should be granted only in exceptional circumstances.

The court stressed that their decision was not an endorsement of schools regulating off-campus speech.

The court stressed the need to evaluate each case on an individual basis.