Doug Lair v. Steve Bullock

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that for Marks to apply “requires that the narrow est opinion is actually the ‘logical subset of other, broader opinions,’ such that it ‘embodies] a position implicitly approved by at least five Justices who support the judgment.’ ” (alteration in original)
• granting stay pending appeal when harm to interested parties “would, at most, be 6 minimal and vastly outweighed by the public interest”
• granting a stay pending appeal of the district court’s injunction enjoining Montana from enforcing its campaign contribution limits
• conducting a Marks analysis to decide whether a splintered Supreme Court decision produced a “majority” opinion that abrogated circuit precedent
• “The only binding aspect of Randall ... is its judgment, striking down the Vermont contribution limit statute as unconstitutional.”
• the narrowest opinion must be the “logical subset of other, broader opinions” (quoting United States v. Rodriguez-Preciado, 399 F.3d 1118, 1140 (9th Cir. 2005))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).