§Why CasetextPricing

GERAWAN FARMING v. AGRICULTURAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD (UNITED FARM WORKERS OF AMERICA)

Amicus Curiae Brief of National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center, Cato Institute, California Farm Bureau Federation, California Fresh Fruit Association, Western Growers Association, and Ventura County Agricultural Association

39 Cited authorities

  1. Village of Willowbrook v. Olech

    528 U.S. 562 (2000)   Cited 6,362 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a class of one could challenge different treatment under the Equal Protection Clause where treatment was alleged to be "irrational and wholly arbitrary"

  2. Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc.

    473 U.S. 432 (1985)   Cited 9,700 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that mental disability is not a quasi-suspect class

  3. Engquist v. Oregon Dep't of Agric.

    553 U.S. 591 (2008)   Cited 2,559 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a class-of-one equal-protection claim cannot be raised in the public-employment context based in part upon the discretionary nature of the employment decisions

  4. Harris v. McRae

    448 U.S. 297 (1980)   Cited 1,420 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Hyde Amendment does not violate the First Amendment

  5. Nixon v. Administrator of General Services

    433 U.S. 425 (1977)   Cited 1,093 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation Act was not an unconstitutional bill of attainder because former President Nixon "constituted a legitimate class of one"

  6. Lazy Y Ranch Ltd. v. Behrens

    546 F.3d 580 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 1,320 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a class-based equal protection claim arises when the "law is applied in a discriminatory manner or imposes different burdens on different classes of people"

  7. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture v. Moreno

    413 U.S. 528 (1973)   Cited 640 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that nothing more than "a bare congressional desire to harm a politically unpopular group" violates the Equal Protection Clause

  8. Industrial Union Department v. American Petroleum Institute

    448 U.S. 607 (1980)   Cited 277 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Finding an unconstitutional delegation because "[i]t is difficult to imagine a more obvious example of Congress simply avoiding a choice which was both fundamental for purposes of the statute and yet politically so divisive that the necessary decision or compromise was difficult, if not impossible"

  9. National Woodwork Manufacturers Ass'n v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    386 U.S. 612 (1967)   Cited 391 times
    Holding that union employees' refusal to install third-party manufacturer's product was not prohibited under § 158(b)(B), because it was an action "pressuring the [union members'] employer for agreements regulating relations between [the employer] and his own employees"

  10. Gerhart v. Lake County

    637 F.3d 1013 (9th Cir. 2011)   Cited 299 times
    Holding that any claim of entitlement to a government benefit must be supported by an independent source

  11. Section 152 - Definitions

    29 U.S.C. § 152   Cited 3,188 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Defining a supervisor to include “any individual having authority . . . to hire, transfer, suspend, lay off, recall, promote, discharge, assign, reward, or discipline other employees, or responsibly to direct them, or to adjust their grievances, or effectively to recommend such action, if in connection with the foregoing the exercise of such authority is not of a merely routine or clerical nature, but requires the use of independent judgment”

  12. Section 7

    Cal. Const. art. I § 7   Cited 2,114 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Guaranteeing due process and equal protection

  13. Section 9 - Powers Denied to Congress

    U.S. Const. art. I, § 9   Cited 2,772 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting Congress

  14. Section 9

    Cal. Const. art. I § 9   Cited 672 times   2 Legal Analyses

    A bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts may not be passed. Cal. Const. art. I § 9

  15. Section 1

    Cal. Const. art. IV § 1   Cited 176 times
    Reserving to the people of California “the powers of initiative and referendum”

  16. Rule 8.520 - Briefs by parties and amici curiae; judicial notice

    Cal. R. 8.520   Cited 3,153 times

    (a)Parties' briefs; time to file (1) Within 30 days after the Supreme Court files the order of review, the petitioner must serve and file in that court either an opening brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (2) Within 30 days after the petitioner files its brief or the time to do so expires, the opposing party must serve and file either an answer brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (3) The petitioner may file a reply brief on the merits or