R.W. v. D.C.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the state, as parens patriae, has a compelling interest in protecting the welfare of children in general
• noting that the state, as parens patriae, has a compelling interest in protecting the welfare of children in general
• noting that no word used by legislature in subsection connoted any particular, or different, burden of proof
• noting that when considering a vagueness challenge a court considers not only the language, but the legislative objective and the evil it is designed to remedy
• noting that a vagueness challenge which does not involve first amendment concerns must be conducted based on an examination in light of the facts of that particular case
• noting that when considering a vagueness challenge a court considers not only the language, but the legislative objective and the evil it is designed to remedy

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).