Hawaii v. Office of Hawaiian Affairs

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that preambular \whereas\ clauses did not create substantive rights, and emphasizing that \repeals by implication are not favored and will not be presumed unless the intention of the legislature to repeal [is] clear and manifest.\
• stating that in analyzing a statute, courts “begin, as always, with the text of the statute”
• giving several examples of “conciliatory or precatory” statutory provisions that do not create “substantive rights”
• requiring “clear and manifest intent” congressional intent for implied repeal (internal quotation omitted)
• requiring “clear and manifest intent” congressional intent for implied repeal (internal quotation omitted)
• “[Rjepeals by implication are not favored and will not be presumed unless the intention of the legislature to repeal is clear and manifest.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).