Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad v. Kern

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a challenge to an administrative regulation was not yet ripe because the regulation’s impact was not “felt immediately by those subject to it in conducting their day-today affairs”
• recognizing that “whether the regulation is totally beyond the agency’s power under the statute” “presents a purely legal question”
• holding that claims were not ripe where new regulations might never affect plaintiffs and where the impact of the regulation was not “felt immediately by those subject to it in conducting their day-to-day affairs”
• holding that, even though a regulation was “the agency’s considered and formalized determination,” and the issue “presented] a purely legal question,” the lawfulness of the action authorized by the regulation was not fit for judicial resolution, because (inter alia
• holding that claims were not ripe where new regulations might never affect plaintiffs and where the impact of the regulation was not “felt immediately by those subject to it in conducting their day-to-day affairs”
• holding that claims were not ripe where new regulations might never affect plaintiffs and where the impact of the regulation was not \felt immediately by those subject to it in conducting their day-to-day affairs\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).