California Ex Rel. Lockyer v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that private healthcare providers were entitled to intervene as defendants when California challenged a congressional appropriation that risked harming intervenors’ interests
• holding that an applicant “must demonstrate a likeli- hood that the government will abandon or concede a poten- tially meritorious” position
• holding that Government’s proposed limiting construction to the Weldon Amendment created irreconcilable conflict with proposed intervenors’ expansive construction
• authorizing health care providers to intervene in case challenging federal appropriations rider that did not establish enforceable rights or protect the providers’ existing rights
• finding the proposed intervenors had a “significantly protectable” interest where they were the intended beneficiaries of a congressional enactment seeking to protect their “conscience rights”
• “Having found that appellants have a significant protectable interest, we 19 have little difficulty concluding that the disposition of this case may, as a practical matter, 20 affect it.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).