49 Cited authorities

  1. United States v. Salerno

    481 U.S. 739 (1987)   Cited 5,199 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "extensive safeguards" are necessary "to repel a facial challenge"
  2. Citizens United v. Fed. Election Comm'n

    558 U.S. 310 (2010)   Cited 1,545 times   71 Legal Analyses
    Holding that disclaimer and disclosure requirements are subject to exacting scrutiny
  3. United States v. Lopez

    514 U.S. 549 (1995)   Cited 2,336 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Gun-Free School Zones Act "exceeds the authority of Congress to ‘regulate Commerce’ " as it "neither regulates a commercial activity nor" "contains jurisdictional element which would ensure, through case-by-case inquiry, that the firearm possession in question affects interstate commerce" (quoting U.S. Const. Art. I § 8 cl. 3 )
  4. Wash. State Grange v. Wa. State Repub. Party

    552 U.S. 442 (2008)   Cited 1,170 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding courts should "[e]xercis[e] judicial restraint" to prevent "premature interpretations of statutes in areas where their constitutional application might be cloudy."
  5. Gonzales v. Raich

    545 U.S. 1 (2005)   Cited 1,121 times   45 Legal Analyses
    Holding that because “Congress had a rational basis” for concluding that a statute implements Commerce Clause power, the statute falls within the scope of congressional “authority to ‘make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper’ to ‘regulate Commerce ... among the several States' ”
  6. U.S. v. Morrison

    529 U.S. 598 (2000)   Cited 1,244 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Congress exceeded its interstate commerce powers in enacting a civil remedy for victims of gender-motivated violence
  7. Shaffer v. Heitner

    433 U.S. 186 (1977)   Cited 3,130 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, once a judgment is validly rendered against a debtor, the judgment creditor may sue to satisfy the debt with property in a state that lacks personal jurisdiction over the judgment debtor
  8. Ulster County Court v. Allen

    442 U.S. 140 (1979)   Cited 1,846 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that criminal defendants could not mount a facial challenge to a statute that had been constitutionally applied at their trial
  9. Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood

    546 U.S. 320 (2006)   Cited 420 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that lower courts should not have invalidated the entire statute, but should have accounted for the legislature's policy choices and the statute's severability clause
  10. Sabri v. U.S.

    541 U.S. 600 (2004)   Cited 389 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Congress was authorized under the Spending Clause to enact § 666 to "protect spending objects from the menace of local administrators on the take"
  11. Section 183 - Activities not engaged in for profit

    26 U.S.C. § 183   Cited 476 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Authorizing individuals and S-corporations to offset hobby losses
  12. Section 672 - Definitions and rules

    26 U.S.C. § 672   Cited 53 times   10 Legal Analyses

    (a) Adverse party For purposes of this subpart, the term "adverse party" means any person having a substantial beneficial interest in the trust which would be adversely affected by the exercise or nonexercise of the power which he possesses respecting the trust. A person having a general power of appointment over the trust property shall be deemed to have a beneficial interest in the trust. (b) Nonadverse party For purposes of this subpart, the term "nonadverse party" means any person who is not