15 Cited authorities

  1. Plyler v. Doe

    457 U.S. 202 (1982)   Cited 2,549 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that States cannot deny to illegal aliens the free public education they provide to citizens and legally documented aliens
  2. Brown v. Board of Education

    347 U.S. 483 (1954)   Cited 2,508 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that segregating schoolchildren by race is unconstitutional
  3. In re Marriage Cases

    43 Cal.4th 757 (Cal. 2008)   Cited 94 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the denial of the right to marry to same-sex couples violated the state constitution, and that strict scrutiny review applies to laws burdening persons based on sexual orientation
  4. Serrano v. Priest

    18 Cal.3d 728 (Cal. 1976)   Cited 212 times
    Holding California violated the California Constitution in its manner of financing public schools
  5. Martinez v. Regents of University of California

    50 Cal.4th 1277 (Cal. 2010)   Cited 29 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding that "immediate presence" in section 215 had the same meaning as in section 211 and could include a victim being carjacked while baking in the kitchen
  6. Dandamudi v. Tisch

    686 F.3d 66 (2d Cir. 2012)   Cited 19 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a class of temporary work visa holders was subject to strict scrutiny because they were "aliens who have been lawfully admitted to reside and work in the United States" and noting that many of them had been in the U.S. for years and may eventually apply for and obtain permanent residence
  7. Lulac v. Wilson

    908 F. Supp. 755 (C.D. Cal. 1995)   Cited 34 times
    Finding that a subsection of a state statute is an impermissible regulation of immigration because the state classification "is not in any way tied to federal standards "
  8. Sei Fujii v. State

    38 Cal.2d 718 (Cal. 1952)   Cited 66 times
    In Sei Fujii v. State of California, 38 Cal.2d 718, 730-731 [ 242 P.2d 617], the Supreme Court of this state, recognizing that the latest declarations of the United States Supreme Court on the California Alien Land Law were irreconcilable with the approach previously taken in a case which had not been overruled (and in which, unlike the Drueding case, there had been a full-fledged opinion), followed the more recent decisions.
  9. Raffaelli v. Committee of Bar Examiners

    7 Cal.3d 288 (Cal. 1972)   Cited 32 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Raffaelli, the California Supreme Court struck down a California statute excluding aliens from admission to the State Bar. The plaintiff in Raffaelli was an Italian citizen who went to law school in California and passed the California bar exam, but was nevertheless refused admission to the State Bar because he was a citizen of Italy. Employing strict scrutiny analysis because alienage is a suspect class, the Court found that there was no compelling reason to deny aliens admission to the bar.
  10. Piper v. Big Pine School Dist

    193 Cal. 664 (Cal. 1924)   Cited 45 times
    In Piper v. Big Pine School Dist. (1924) 193 Cal. 664 [ 226 P. 926], for example, this court applied the free school guarantee to invalidate a school district's policy of excluding Native American children from the public schools.
  11. Section 1621 - Aliens who are not qualified aliens or nonimmigrants ineligible for State and local public benefits

    8 U.S.C. § 1621   Cited 82 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Granting the U.S. Attorney General sole discretion to exempt certain state or local public benefits from PRWORA’s restrictions
  12. Section 14007.5

    Cal. Welf. and Inst. Code § 14007.5   Cited 5 times

    (a) Aliens shall be eligible for Medi-Cal, whether federally funded or state-funded, only to the same extent as permitted under federal law and regulations for receipt of federal financial participation under Title XIX of the federal Social Security Act, except as otherwise provided in this section and elsewhere in this chapter. (b) In accordance with Section 1903(v)(1) of the federal Social Security Act ( 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1396b(v)(1) ), an alien shall only be eligible for the full scope of Medi-Cal

  13. Section 6060.6

    Cal. Bus. and Prof'l. Code § 6060.6   Cited 1 times

    Notwithstanding Section 30 of this code and Section 17520 of the Family Code, the Committee of Bar Examiners may accept for registration, and the State Bar may process for an original or renewed license to practice law, an application from an individual containing a federal tax identification number, or other appropriate identification number as determined by the State Bar, in lieu of a social security number, if the individual is not eligible for a social security account number at the time of application

  14. Section 123865

    Cal. Health and Saf. Code § 123865

    (a) If the parents or estate of a handicapped child is wholly or partly unable to furnish for the child necessary services, the parents or guardian may apply to the agency of the county that has been designated by the board of supervisors of the county of residence under the terms of Section 123850 to administer the provisions for handicapped children. Residence shall be determined in accordance with Sections 243 and 244 of the Government Code. (b) If the child has an individualized education program

  15. Rule 8.204 - Contents and format of briefs

    Cal. R. 8.204   Cited 2,726 times

    (a) Contents (1) Each brief must: (A) Begin with a table of contents and a table of authorities separately listing cases, constitutions, statutes, court rules, and other authorities cited; (B) State each point under a separate heading or subheading summarizing the point, and support each point by argument and, if possible, by citation of authority; and (C) Support any reference to a matter in the record by a citation to the volume and page number of the record where the matter appears. If any part