20 Idaho opinions name it 2 courts 1975–2023 5 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Idaho 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 |
|---|---|---|
Van Valkenburgh v. Citizens for Term Limitsgreen2 sentences2021Under the strict scrutiny standard of review, a law which infringes on a fundamental right will be upheld only where the State can demonstrate the law is necessary to promote a compelling state interest. 135 Idaho at 126 , 15 P.3d at 1134 (internal citations omitted). 2021Under the strict scrutiny standard of review, a law which infringes on a fundamental right will be upheld only where the State can demonstrate the law is necessary to promote a compelling state interest. 135 Idaho at 126 , 15 P.3d at 1134 (internal citations omitted). | 3 | 3 |
State v. Missamoregreen2 sentences1997See State v. Missamore, 119 Idaho 27, 33 , 803 P.2d 528, 534 (1990). 1997See State v. Missamore, 119 Idaho 27, 33 , 803 P.2d 528, 534 (1990). | 2 | 2 |
Newlan v. Stategreen2 sentences1984Although the Tarboxes urge the strict scrutiny standard, that level of review would be inappropriate in this case as they do not fall into a “suspect class”, nor does the statute in question infringe upon a funda *960 mental right. 1 See id.; Newlan v. State, 96 Idaho 711, 713-714 , 535 P.2d 1348 (1975). 1984Although the Tarboxes urge the strict scrutiny standard, that level of review would be inappropriate in this case as they do not fall into a “suspect class”, nor does the statute in question infringe upon a funda *960 mental right. 1 See id.; Newlan v. State, 96 Idaho 711, 713-714 , 535 P.2d 1348 (1975). | 1 | 3 |
Olsen v. J.A. Freeman Co.green2 sentences2021Id. (stating that the rational basis test 13 is employed when the strict scrutiny test and means-focus test are not applicable). 2021Id. (stating that the rational basis test 13 is employed when the strict scrutiny test and means-focus test are not applicable). | 1 | 2 |
Tarbox v. Tax Commissiongreen2 sentences1993Although, as the appellants correctly observe, this Court, in cases decided after Thompson , embraced the strict scrutiny analysis under our state constitution in cases where fundamental rights are involved (the “two-tiered strict scrutiny” test mentioned above), see, e.g., Tarbox, 107 Idaho at 959-60 , 695 P.2d at 344-45 ; Olsen v. J.A. 1993Although, as the appellants correctly observe, this Court, in cases decided after Thompson , embraced the strict scrutiny analysis under our state constitution in cases where fundamental rights are involved (the “two-tiered strict scrutiny” test mentioned above), see, e.g., Tarbox, 107 Idaho at 959-60 , 695 P.2d at 344-45 ; Olsen v. J.A. | 1 | 2 |
State v. Doegreen2 sentences2023State v. Doe, 148 Idaho 919, 935 , 231 P.3d 1016, 1032 (2010), quoting Regents of the Univ. of Cal. V. 2023State v. Doe, 148 Idaho 919, 935 , 231 P.3d 1016, 1032 (2010), quoting Regents of the Univ. of Cal. V. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Brandtgreen2 sentences2021They cite to State v. Brandt to support their contention. 135 Idaho 205, 207 , 16 P.3d 302, 304 (Ct. App. 2000) (stating that prisoners have a fundamental constitutional right of access to the courts). 2021They cite to State v. Brandt to support their contention. 135 Idaho 205, 207 , 16 P.3d 302, 304 (Ct. App. 2000) (stating that prisoners have a fundamental constitutional right of access to the courts). | 1 | 1 |
Schweiker v. Wilsongreen2 sentences2005Mem’l Hosp., 415 U.S. at 264 , 94 S.Ct. at 1085 , 39 L.Ed.2d at 318 ; See also Schweiker v. Wilson, 450 U.S. 221, 238 , 101 S.Ct. 1074, 1084 , 67 L.Ed.2d 186, 200 (1981) (holding Congress should have discretion in deciding how to expend necessarily limited resources). 2005Mem’l Hosp., 415 U.S. at 264 , 94 S.Ct. at 1085 , 39 L.Ed.2d at 318 ; See also Schweiker v. Wilson, 450 U.S. 221, 238 , 101 S.Ct. 1074, 1084 , 67 L.Ed.2d 186, 200 (1981) (holding Congress should have discretion in deciding how to expend necessarily limited resources). | 1 | 1 |
League of Women Voters v. Diamondgreen1 sentence2001See also League of Women Voters v. Diamond, 965 F.Supp. 96 (1997) (finding that if restrictions are severe enough, such as being content based, the restrictions are subject to a strict scrutiny analysis, but when they are not severe such as being content neutral, they are subject to low level review). | 1 | 1 |
Leliefeld v. Johnsongreen2 sentences1999See Leliefeld v. Johnson, 104 Idaho 357, 373 , 659 P.2d 111, 127 (1983). 1999See Leliefeld v. Johnson, 104 Idaho 357, 373 , 659 P.2d 111, 127 (1983). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Reedgreen2 sentences1998Thompson v. Hagan, 96 Idaho 19 , 523 P.2d 1365 (1974); State v. Reed, 107 Idaho 162, 168 , 686 P.2d 842, 848 (Ct.App.1984). 1998Thompson v. Hagan, 96 Idaho 19 , 523 P.2d 1365 (1974); State v. Reed, 107 Idaho 162, 168 , 686 P.2d 842, 848 (Ct.App.1984). | 1 | 1 |
White v. Stategreen2 sentences1987White v. State, 203 Mont. 363 , 661 P.2d 1272, 1274-75 (1983). 1987White v. State, 203 Mont. 363 , 661 P.2d 1272, 1274-75 (1983). | 1 | 1 |
State v. O'BRYANgreen2 sentences1984The court upheld the statute, concluding that the statutory classification was reasonably related to its purpose "to protect the community from threats posed to public health and safety by use of marijuana." State v. O'Bryan, 96 Idaho at 553, 531 P.2d at 1198 . 1984The court upheld the statute, concluding that the statutory classification was reasonably related to its purpose “to protect the community from threats posed to public health and safety by use of marijuana.” State v. O’Bryan, 96 Idaho at 553, 531 P.2d at 1198 . | 1 | 1 |
Dandridge v. Williamsgreen2 sentences1977See Dandridge v. Williams, 397 U.S. 471 , 90 S.Ct. 1153 , 25 L.Ed.2d 491 (1970). 1977See Dandridge v. Williams, 397 U.S. 471 , 90 S.Ct. 1153 , 25 L.Ed.2d 491 (1970). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Thompson v. Hagan
green
2 sentences1998Thompson v. Hagan, 96 Idaho 19 , 523 P.2d 1365 (1974); State v. Reed, 107 Idaho 162, 168 , 686 P.2d 842, 848 (Ct.App.1984). 1998Thompson v. Hagan, 96 Idaho 19 , 523 P.2d 1365 (1974); State v. Reed, 107 Idaho 162, 168 , 686 P.2d 842, 848 (Ct.App.1984). | 3 | 1975–1998 |
Memorial Hospital v. Maricopa County
green
2 sentences2005Mem’l Hosp., 415 U.S. at 264 , 94 S.Ct. at 1085 , 39 L.Ed.2d at 318 ; See also Schweiker v. Wilson, 450 U.S. 221, 238 , 101 S.Ct. 1074, 1084 , 67 L.Ed.2d 186, 200 (1981) (holding Congress should have discretion in deciding how to expend necessarily limited resources). 2005Mem’l Hosp., 415 U.S. at 264 , 94 S.Ct. at 1085 , 39 L.Ed.2d at 318 ; See also Schweiker v. Wilson, 450 U.S. 221, 238 , 101 S.Ct. 1074, 1084 , 67 L.Ed.2d 186, 200 (1981) (holding Congress should have discretion in deciding how to expend necessarily limited resources). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Idaho Schools for Equal Educational Opportunity v. Evans
green
1 sentence1998Id. | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Burdick v. Takushi
green
2 sentences1997Burdick v. Takushi, 504 U.S. 428, 432-33 , 112 S.Ct. 2059, 2062-63 , 119 L.Ed.2d 245 (1992). 1997Burdick v. Takushi, 504 U.S. 428, 432-33 , 112 S.Ct. 2059, 2062-63 , 119 L.Ed.2d 245 (1992). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Shapiro v. Thompson
green
2 sentences1992As to the right to travel, she contends that the requirement cannot pass muster under the strict scrutiny standard, and she cites to Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 , 89 S.Ct. 1322 , 22 L.Ed.2d 600 (1969), in support of her contention that this high standard must be applied to the Payette requirement. 1992As to the right to travel, she contends that the requirement cannot pass muster under the strict scrutiny standard, and she cites to Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 , 89 S.Ct. 1322 , 22 L.Ed.2d 600 (1969), in support of her contention that this high standard must be applied to the Payette requirement. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections
green
2 sentences1982If a tax measure were to infringe upon equal protection by the creation of a suspect classification or infringement upon a fundamental right, such might well justify the application of the strict scrutiny test, Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, 383 U.S. 663 , 86 S.Ct. 1079 , 16 L.Ed.2d 164 (1966) (state poll tax held unconstitutional), but in other classifications for tax purposes, we deem the rational basis test appropriate under both the state and federal constitutional equal protection provisions. 1982If a tax measure were to infringe upon equal protection by the creation of a suspect classification or infringement upon a fundamental right, such might well justify the application of the strict scrutiny test, Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, 383 U.S. 663 , 86 S.Ct. 1079 , 16 L.Ed.2d 164 (1966) (state poll tax held unconstitutional), but in other classifications for tax purposes, we deem the rational basis test appropriate under both the state and federal constitutional equal protection provisions. | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Twin Falls Clinic & Hospital Building Corp. v. Hamill
green
2 sentences1982Twin Falls Clinic v. Hamill, 103 Idaho 19 , 644 P.2d 341 (1982); Idaho Quarterhorse Breeders Ass’n, Inc. v. Ada County Fair Board, 101 Idaho 339 , 612 P.2d 1186 (1980). 1982Twin Falls Clinic v. Hamill, 103 Idaho 19 , 644 P.2d 341 (1982); Idaho Quarterhorse Breeders Ass’n, Inc. v. Ada County Fair Board, 101 Idaho 339 , 612 P.2d 1186 (1980). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Idaho Quarterhorse Breeders Ass'n v. Ada County Fair Board
green
2 sentences1982Twin Falls Clinic v. Hamill, 103 Idaho 19 , 644 P.2d 341 (1982); Idaho Quarterhorse Breeders Ass’n, Inc. v. Ada County Fair Board, 101 Idaho 339 , 612 P.2d 1186 (1980). 1982Twin Falls Clinic v. Hamill, 103 Idaho 19 , 644 P.2d 341 (1982); Idaho Quarterhorse Breeders Ass’n, Inc. v. Ada County Fair Board, 101 Idaho 339 , 612 P.2d 1186 (1980). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Rodriguez v. San Antonio Independent School District
green
1 sentence1975The majority rejects any application of the two tier test as discussed in Rodriguez, supra. They take the two fold approach that (1) the strict scrutiny test is a hopelessly mechanical test ill-suited to complex analysis 2 and (2) Idaho has never adopted the test. | 1 | 1975–1975 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.