Home Depot, Inc., and Gaylord's National Corporation v. William J. Guste, Jr., Attorney General of the State of Louisiana, Defendant

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that a Louisiana law barring the sale of certain items on Sunday was not facially unconstitutional because “there is patently a substantial core of products to which [the statute] is not impermissibly vague”
• finding that a Louisiana law barring the 36 sale of certain items on Sunday was not facially unconstitutional because “there is patently a substantial core of products to which [the statute] is not impermissibly vague”
• stating agreement with district court that Louisiana Sunday closing law did not violate First Amendment
• upholding closing law applicable to roughly 15% of state’s work force
• “[I]n suits involving a challenge to the rational basis of a statute, the burden is not upon the state to establish the rationality of its statute, but is upon the challenger to show that the restriction is wholly arbitrary.”
• “lax vagueness standard [is] applicable to statutes regulating economic activity”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).