these courts were created by act of Congress.” Chambers, 501 U.S. at 47 (internal quotation marks omitted); see, e.g., McConnell, 370 U.S. at 233-34, 82 S.Ct. 1288 (noting that Congress has limited courts’ inherent powers to sanction attorney contempt by requiring such sanctions to be no more severe than necessary). This does not mean that Congress may infringe — or authorize Judicial Councils to infringe — upon judges’ trial management authority in any manner it sees fit. It is a familiar principle that even though Congress has the power to create lower federal courts and organize their functioning in certain respects, it can neither interfere with nor alter essential features of their operation. See, e.g., Plant v. Spendthrift Farm, 514 U.S. 211, 240, 115 S.Ct. 1447, 131 L.Ed.2d 328 (<HOLDING>). Having vested authority to conduct trials in
holding that courts review judgments not statements in opinions recognizing state laws can be preempted by federal regulations as well as by federal legislation holding that  1983 applies to violations of any federal statute not just equal rights legislation recognizing that judgments of arizona courts on foreign judgments will not be conclusive in the jurisdiction of origin holding that congress may not pass legislation that reopens final judgments of federal courts