§Why CasetextPricing

Franciscan Alliance, Inc. et al v. Burwell et al

REPLY

39 Cited authorities

  1. Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife

    504 U.S. 555 (1992)   Cited 27,821 times   138 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"

  2. Univ. of Tex. Sw. Med. Ctr. v. Nassar

    570 U.S. 338 (2013)   Cited 5,208 times   78 Legal Analyses
    Holding that application of the " ‘because’ of" requirement of Title VII's antiretaliation provision requires proof of "but-for" causation

  3. Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Res. Def. Council

    467 U.S. 837 (1984)   Cited 16,016 times   502 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts "must give effect to the unambiguously expressed intent of Congress"

  4. Lujan v. National Wildlife Federation

    497 U.S. 871 (1990)   Cited 9,535 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to admit affidavits in support of standing when filed after summary judgment briefing and hearing were complete

  5. Sossamon v. Texas

    563 U.S. 277 (2011)   Cited 1,628 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding RLUIPA's authorization of "appropriate relief" did not "clearly and unambiguously waive sovereign immunity to private suits for damages"

  6. Food & Drug Administration v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.

    529 U.S. 120 (2000)   Cited 1,504 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Congress had not yet empowered the FDA to regulate tobacco products

  7. King v. Burwell

    574 U.S. 988 (2015)   Cited 670 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Congress did not delegate health insurance policy to Internal Revenue Service

  8. National Park Hospitality Assn. v. Dept. of Interior

    538 U.S. 803 (2003)   Cited 1,009 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that although the question presented was purely legal and the rule constituted final action, further factual development would "significantly advance our ability to deal with the legal issues presented" so the matter was not ripe for judicial review

  9. Thomas Jefferson Univ. v. Shalala

    512 U.S. 504 (1994)   Cited 1,276 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the agency’s interpretation must be given controlling weight unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation"

  10. Gregory v. Ashcroft

    501 U.S. 452 (1991)   Cited 987 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding Missouri's judicial age limitation of 70 rationally related to such legitimate purposes as avoiding laborious testing of older judges' physical and mental acuity, promoting orderly attrition of judges, and recognizing that judges' remoteness from public view makes determination of competency, and removal from office, more difficult than for other office-holders

  11. Section 706 - Scope of review

    5 U.S.C. § 706   Cited 20,433 times   184 Legal Analyses
    Granting courts jurisdiction to "compel agency action unlawfully held or unreasonably delayed"

  12. Section 1681 - Sex

    20 U.S.C. § 1681   Cited 4,367 times   79 Legal Analyses
    Referencing application of Title IX prohibitions to school admissions

  13. Section 18116 - Nondiscrimination

    42 U.S.C. § 18116   Cited 281 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Granting the HHS Secretary power to promulgate Section 1557's implementing regulations through notice and comment

  14. Section 162.0021 - Interference With Physician's Professional Judgment Prohibited

    Tex. Occ. Code § 162.0021   Cited 4 times

    A health organization certified under Section 162.001(b) may not interfere with, control, or otherwise direct a physician's professional judgment in violation of this subchapter or any other provision of law, including board rules. Tex. Occ. Code § 162.0021 Added by Acts 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., Ch. 670, Sec. 1, eff. 9/1/2011.

  15. Section 92.4 - Assurances

    45 C.F.R. § 92.4   Cited 22 times   5 Legal Analyses

    (a)Assurances. An entity applying for Federal financial assistance to which this part applies shall, as a condition of any application for Federal financial assistance, submit an assurance, on a form specified by the Director of the Department's Office for Civil Rights, that the entity's health programs or activities will be operated in compliance with section 1557 and this part. A health insurance issuer seeking certification to participate in an Exchange or a State seeking approval to operate a

  16. Section 92.5 - Enforcement mechanisms

    45 C.F.R. § 92.5   Cited 6 times   1 Legal Analyses

    (a) The enforcement mechanisms provided for, and available under, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ( 42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.), Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 ( 20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 ( 42 U.S.C. 6101 et seq.), or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 ( 29 U.S.C. 794 ), including under the Department's regulations implementing those statutes, shall apply for purposes of violations of § 92.2 of this part. (b) The Director of the Office

  17. Section R9-22-205 - Attending Physician, Practitioner, and Primary Care Provider Services

    Ariz. Admin. Code § 9-22-205   Cited 3 times

    A.A primary care provider, attending physician, or practitioner shall provide primary care provider services within the provider's scope of practice under A.R.S. Title 32. A member may receive primary care provider services in an inpatient or outpatient setting including at a minimum: 1. Periodic health examination and assessment; 2. Evaluation and diagnostic workup; 3. Medically necessary treatment; 4. Prescriptions for medication and medically necessary supplies and equipment; 5. Referral to a