Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 2004–2022 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Kansas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Wilson v. Sebeliusgreen2 sentences2020See Wilson v. Sebelius, 276 Kan. 87, 91 , 72 P.3d 553 (2003). "[A]ppellate courts generally avoid making unnecessary constitutional 4 decisions." 276 Kan. at 91 . 2020See Wilson v. Sebelius, 276 Kan. 87, 91 , 72 P.3d 553 (2003). "[A]ppellate courts generally avoid making unnecessary constitutional 4 decisions." 276 Kan. at 91 . | 1 | 1 |
State v. Rycegreen2 sentences2019See State v. Ryce , 303 Kan. 899 , 966, 368 P.3d 342 (2016) (Stegall, J., dissenting) (distinguishing the constitutional avoidance doctrine, which preserves the Legislature's policy choices, from deference, which abdicates the judicial role), adhered to on reh'g 306 Kan. 682 , 396 P.3d 711 (2017). 2019See State v. Ryce , 303 Kan. 899 , 966, 368 P.3d 342 (2016) (Stegall, J., dissenting) (distinguishing the constitutional avoidance doctrine, which preserves the Legislature's policy choices, from deference, which abdicates the judicial role), adhered to on reh'g 306 Kan. 682 , 396 P.3d 711 (2017). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Marbury v. Madison
green
2 sentences2022The doctrine of constitutional avoidance Judicial recognition of constitutional avoidance flows from Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137, 170 , 2 L. 2022The doctrine of constitutional avoidance Judicial recognition of constitutional avoidance flows from Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137, 170 , 2 L. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Hoesli v. Triplett, Inc.
green
1 sentence2021It imposes a duty on the court to "construe a statute as constitutionally valid when it is faced with more than one reasonable interpretation." Hoesli, 303 Kan. at 367-68 . | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Department of Housing and Urban Development v. Rucker
green
2 sentences2004"However, this doctrine of constitutional avoidance `"has no application in the absence of statutory ambiguity."' HUD v. Rucker, 535 U.S. 125 , 122 S. Ct. 1230 , *542 1235, 152 L. 2004"However, this doctrine of constitutional avoidance `"has no application in the absence of statutory ambiguity."' HUD v. Rucker, 535 U.S. 125 , 122 S. Ct. 1230 , *542 1235, 152 L. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative
green
2 sentences2004Ed. 2d 258 (2002) (quoting United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative, 532 U.S. 483, 494 , 121 S. Ct. 1711 , 149 L. 2004Ed. 2d 258 (2002) (quoting United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative, 532 U.S. 483, 494 , 121 S. Ct. 1711 , 149 L. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.