McMahan v. City and County of San Francisco

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a funding provision was volitionally severa-ble from the primary regulatory scheme
• finding provisions of law volitionally severable when court “confident that the provisions [to be retained after severance] would have received the endorsement of the vast majority of voters, even [without the unconstitutional part]”
• “appellants concede[d] the invalid funding mandate [was] grammatically severable” because it was a completely separate portion of the statute
• “appellants conceded] the invalid funding mandate [was] grammatically severable” because it was a completely separate portion of the statute
• \[T]he sole issue we must decide is whether the valid portion of the Care Not Cash law that requires a change from assistance through cash to assistance through services can be severed from the admittedly invalid funding mandate.\
• “All three criteria must be satisfied.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).