Chris T. Dehart v. Town of Austin, Indiana

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding the AWA “does not evince an intent to preempt state or local regulation of animal or public welfare” because it “expressly contemplates state and local regulation of animals”
• “Even if the [state law] produces onerous consequences for DeHart’s business, preemption is not established.”
• “The regulation of animals has long been recognized as part of the historic police power of the States.”
• “When the federal government acts within its constitutional authority, it is empowered to preempt state or local laws to the extent it believes such action to be necessary to achieve its purposes.”
• “When the federal government acts within its constitutional authority, it is empowered to preempt state or local laws to the extent it believes such action to be necessary to achieve its purposes.”
• due process claim held premature because no deprivation had occurred yet

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).