United States v. Robert Shelton

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that indirect coercion, not just outright prohibitions, is subject to strict scrutiny under the First Amendment
• noting that courts should “avoid reaching constitutional questions in advance of the necessity of deciding them.”
• acknowledging that the threat to the Indian plaintiffs’ “religious practices is extremely grave”
• acknowledging that the threat to the Indian plaintiffs’ “religious practices is extremely grave”
• “being that specified to a large degree or in the main”
• “A fundamental and longstanding principle of judicial restraint requires that courts avoid reaching constitutional questions in advance of the necessity of deciding them.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).