Rosas-Jose v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that classifications challenged under the Equal Protection Clause may be non-arbitrary even though imperfect
• holding that restraints on judicial review have added force “where the legislature must necessarily engage in a process of line-drawing”
• holding that classifications challenged under the Equal Protection Clause may be non-arbitrary even though imperfect
• recognizing that preservation of pension funds is valid reason to treat pensioners differently
• noting that where, under rational basis review, “there are plausible reasons for Congress’ action, our inquiry is at an end”
• stating that statutory “railroad [retirement] benefits, like social security benefits, are not contractual and may be altered or even eliminated at any time”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).