lemon lines



Untitled






FollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowedFollowed

Above the Law
Adrianna
Andrew Durham
Antoine Doyen
Dr. Bacevich
Benen
Bill Pierce
Cassel
C.V.
Denk
Evan
Feminist Law Professors
Granta
Hadley
Hidden LA
Immigration
In These Times
IntLawGrrls
Ira
Joe
Jonah
Jonathan
Killian
Lawrence Hurley
LGBT law
Lukács
Mal
The Millions
Moran
PRI
Sarvas
SCOTUS blog
Sophia
SweetHotJustice
TNR
The Two-Way
WSJ Law Blog

klammer
Tagged
concurrence


Monday, Mar 19th, 2012
The propaganda technique used in this case significantly increases the risk of unwanted pregnancy and venereal disease. It is as though a State decided to dramatize its disapproval of motorcycles by forbidding the use of safety helmets. One need not posit a constitutional right to ride a motorcycle to characterize such a restriction as irrational and perverse.

Carey v. Population Services, Int’l

431 U.S. 678 (1977)


∞09:15 am, by lemonlines1 note Comments
[Stevens] [concurrence] [sex] [motorcycles] [analogy] [propaganda] [law]

Friday, Feb 24th, 2012
We have a written Constitution; and it is full of ‘thou shalt nots’ directed at Congress and the President as well as at the courts. And the role of the federal courts is not only to serve as referee between the States and the center but also to protect the individual against prohibited conduct by the other two branches of the Federal Government.

Flast v. Cohen

392 U.S. 83 (1968)


∞01:48 pm, by lemonlines1 note Comments
[Douglas] [concurrence] [taxpayer] [standing] [role of the judiciary] [law]

Monday, Dec 26th, 2011
[A]n arbitrary interference with access to important information is an abridgment of the freedoms of speech and of the press protected by the First Amendment.

Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia

448 U.S. 555 (1980)


∞12:11 pm, by lemonlines54 notes Comments
[Stevens] [first amendment] [concurrence] [press] [law]

Thursday, Jul 21st, 2011
Rich or penniless, Duncan’s citizenship under the Constitution pledges his strength to the defense of California as a part of the United States, and his right to migrate to any part of the land he must defend is something she must respect under the same instrument. Unless this Court is willing to say that citizenship of the United States means at least this much to the citizen, then our heritage of constitutional privileges and immunities is only a promise to the ear to be broken to the hope, a teasing illusion like a munificent bequest in a pauper’s will.

Edwards v. People of State of California

314 U.S. 160


∞12:24 am, by lemonlines46 notes Comments
[Jackson] [concurrence] [California] [indigent] [right to travel] [wealth]

Tuesday, Jul 12th, 2011
If the historic landmark on the hill in Boerne happened to be a museum or an art gallery owned by an atheist, it would not be eligible for an exemption from the city ordinances that forbid an enlargement of the structure. Because the landmark is owned by the Catholic Church, it is claimed that RFRA gives its owner a federal statutory entitlement to an exemption from a generally applicable, neutral civil law. Whether the Church would actually prevail under the statute or not, the statute has provided the Church with a legal weapon that no atheist or agnostic can obtain. This governmental preference for religion, as opposed to irreligion, is forbidden by the First Amendment.

City of Boerne v. Flores

521 U.S. 507


∞09:29 am, by lemonlines6 notes Comments
[Fourteenth Amendment] [I miss Stevens] [Stevens] [Texas] [atheism] [concurrence] [congruence] [contributing property] [first amendment] [historic preservation] [proportionality] [law]

  |   Next Page
Likes