United States v. Allan A. Mussari, United States of America v. Donald W. Schroeder

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the support obligation is a “thing in interstate commerce” because it must be met “by a payment that will normally move in interstate commerce”
• rejecting challenge to a federal statute criminalizing non-payment of child support because it was a “regulation of a fundamental familial relation”
• reaching the same conclusion and observing that a delinquent parent’s “intentional refusal to satisfy the debt is as much an obstruction of commerce between the states as any act of extortion made unlawful by the Hobbs Act”
• reaching the same conclusion and observing that a delinquent parent's \intentional refusal to satisfy the debt is as much an obstruction of commerce between the states as any act of extortion made unlawful by the Hobbs Act\
• reaching the same conclusion and observing that a delinquent parent's \intentional refusal to satisfy the debt is as much an obstruction of commerce between the states as any act of extortion made unlawful by the Hobbs Act\
• no concerns of federalism and comity implicated by federal law criminalizing interstate conduct not criminalized by state where conduct occurred

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).