green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
3.5 score
“in any event, jurisdictional elements do not necessarily preclude 'as-applied' commerce clause challenges.”
Treatment trajectory · 1998 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1998
2012
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
GDF Realty Investments, Ltd. v. Norton
in any event, jurisdictional elements do not necessarily preclude 'as-applied' commerce clause challenges.
discussed
Cited "see"
Samuel M. Rizzitelli v. Federal Labor Relations Authority
See Patent Office Professional Ass’n v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 128 F.3d 751, 753 (D.C.Cir.1997) (“[A] decision of the General Counsel of FLRA not to file a complaint is not judicially reviewable given that the statute provides for review only of decisions of the Authority.”), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1006 , 118 S.Ct. 1189 , 140 L.Ed.2d 319 (1998); see also American Fed’n of Gov’t Employees Local 1749 v. Federal Labor *713 Relations Auth., 842 F.2d 102 (5th Cir.1988) (per curiam); Martinez v. Smith, 768 F.2d 479 (1st Cir.1985) (per curiam); Turgeon, 677 F.2d at 940 .
cited
Cited "see"
Barnett v. Jamesway Corp. (In Re Jamesway Corp.)
See Local Union 7107 v. Clinchfield Coal Co., 124 F.3d 639, 640 (4th Cir.1997) cert. denied — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 1189 , 140 L.Ed.2d 319 (1998); Alarcon v. Keller Indus.
discussed
Cited "see"
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. JASON BYNUM, also known as Jason James Bynum
See United States v. Bird, 124 F.3d 667, 684 (5th Cir. 1997), cert. denied, 118 S. Ct. 1189 (1998) (defendant’s conviction for violent activity under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act constitutes sufficient governmental interest to justify temporary limitation on his First Amendment rights); Wright, 86 F.3d at 65 (persons on supervised release do not enjoy absolute liberty but only conditional liberty dependent upon observance of special conditions).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Operation Rescue National
See also, United States v. Bird, 124 F.3d 667 , 676 n. 10 (5th Cir.1997) (noting, in the context of a Commerce Clause challenge to FACE, that the Tenth Amendment does not limit the power of Congress under that Clause), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1006 , 118 S.Ct. 1189 , 140 L.Ed.2d 320 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. McMillan
See also United States v. Bird, 124 F.3d 667 (5th Cir.1997), ce rt. denied, — U.S. —, 118 S.Ct. 1189 , 140 L.Ed.2d 320 (1998) (finding FACE to be a legitimate regulation of intrastate activity, neither overbroad nor vague, and upholding condition that protestor stay at least 1000 feet away from clinic after shouting to doctor, “I will kill you,” and throwing a bottle at doctor’s car).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Schouman
v.
Securities and Exchange Commission
v.
Securities and Exchange Commission
No. 97-1268.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 9, 1998.
C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.