Rubin Bros. Footwear v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• holding rule facially valid as not unconstitutional under Article I, section 8, of the Oregon Constitution
• declining to address a constitutional argument that was asserted but not developed
• in reviewing the validity of a rule under ORS 183.400(1), “we are limited to consideration of the rule itself, statutory provisions authorizing the rule, and documents bearing on compliance with rulemaking procedures”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).