Indiana Board of Pharmacy v. Paul J Elmer

How courts have described this case

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

• “[T]he Supreme Court has long recognized that a later-enacted statute trumps an earlier-enacted treaty to the extent the two conflict. This is known as the last-in-time rule.”
• \[T]he Supreme Court has long recognized that a later-enacted statute trumps an earlier-enacted treaty to the extent the two conflict. This is known as the last-in-time rule.\
• “[A]n ambiguous statute should be construed where fairly possible not to abrogate a treaty.”
• “Courts apply a statute according to its terms even if the statute conflicts with a prior treaty (the last-in-time rule), but where fairly possible, courts tend to construe an ambiguous statute not to conflict with a prior treaty (the canon against abrogation).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).