Commonwealth v. Black, K.

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 “Equal Protection Clause does not forbid classifications,” but “simply keeps governmental decisionmakers from treating differently persons who are in all relevant respects alike”
• holding that the Equal Protection Clause generally only prohibits “governmental decisionmakers from treating differently persons who are in all relevant respects alike”
• holding that the Equal Protection Clause “keeps governmental 19 decisionmakers from treating differently persons who are in all relevant respects alike”
• holding that “the Bucks County District Attorney’s Office is not an entity for purposes of § 1983 liability”
• holding that the Equal Protection Clause is generally satisfied “so long as there is a plausible policy reason for the classification”
• holding that the legislature need not “actually articulate at any time the purpose or rationale supporting its classification”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).