Arizona v. Shalala

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that where a case “raises a purely legal question, threshold suitability for judicial determination is assumed”
• declining to consider argument under Local Rule 7(a)’s predecessor rule because party did not cite authority
• stating “courts should not address an asserted but unanalyzed argument because . . . courts do not sit as self-directed boards of legal inquiry and research” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)
• “[I]t is well established that an interpretative guidance issued without formal notice and comment rulemaking can qualify as final agency action.” (collecting cases)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).