Arizona Board of Regents v. Harper

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the Board was “perfectly within its rights” to classify plaintiffs as non-residents based on lack of proof; but stating that the Board must revise its procedures to comply with students’ due process rights
• holding that the Board was \perfectly within its rights\ to classify plaintiffs as non-residents based on lack of proof; but stating that the Board must revise its procedures to comply with students' due process rights
• upholding Board’s ability to differentiate between residents and non-residents with respect to tuition rates
• issue was not whether the Board exceeded its discretion, but whether the constitutional provisions barred discrimination
• domicile requires physical presence and intent to remain permanently and a person may have only one domicile at a time
• “Domicile is primarily a state of mind combined with actual physical presence in the state.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).