Citation network
Kassel Vs. Consolidated Freightways Corp.
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 24, 1981
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
-
Kassel v. ConsolidatedSearch
-
Freightways Corp. - 450 U.S. 662 (1981) U.S. Supreme Court Kassel v. ConsolidatedSearch
-
Freightways Corp., 450 U.S. 662 (1981) Kassel v. ConsolidatedSearch
-
Iowa truck length limitations unconstitutionally burden interstate commerce. See Raymond Motor Transportation, Inc. v. RiceSearch
-
light of these findings, the District Court applied the standard we enunciated in Raymond Motor Transportation, Inc. v. RiceSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Hunt v. WashingtonSearch
-
Tea Co. v. CottrellSearch
-
Southern Pacific Co. v. ArizonaSearch
-
Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. NewSearch
-
South Carolina State Highway Dept. v. BarnwellSearch
-
Bibb v. NavajoSearch
-
Pike v. BruceSearch
-
Iowa truck length limitations unconstitutionally burden interstate commerce. In Raymond Motor Transportation, Inc. v. RiceSearch
-
For an illustration of the differences between singles and doubles, see Raymond Motor Transportation, Inc. v. RiceSearch
-
these regulations void because their promulgation was impermissibly tied to legislative action. Motor Club of Iowa v. DepartmentSearch
-
Locomotive Firemen v. ChicagoSearch
-
n. 10. It should be emphasized that Raymond, the analysis of which was derived from the Court's opinion in Pike v. BruceSearch
-
in this case is nearly identical to the Wisconsin regulation struck down in Raymond Motor Transportation, Inc. v. RiceSearch
-
the burden imposed on commerce against the local benefits sought to be achieved by the State's lawmakers. See Pike v. BruceSearch
-
and on the evidence before or available to them that might have supported their judgment. See generally Minnesota v. CloverSearch
-
could rationally have believed that the challenged regulation would foster those purposes. See Locomotive Firemen v. ChicagoSearch
-
Page 450 U. S. 681 that the regulation is not wholly irrational in light of it purpose. See Minnesota v. CloverSearch
-
this Court has condemned in the economic area. Philadelphia v. NewSearch
-
asserted burdens against intended benefits, as it is in other fields. Compare Raymond Motor Transportation, Inc. v. RiceSearch
-
U. S. 429 , 434 U. S. 449 (1978) (BLACKMUN, J., concurring) (safety regulation), with Pike v. BruceSearch
-
Post at 450 U. S. 702 . Apparently, he has overlooked such cases as Allied Stores of Ohio, Inc. v. BowersSearch
-
U. S. 522 (1959), where we described the rationale for our earlier decision in Wheeling Steel Corp. v. GlanderSearch
-
U.S. at 358 U. S. 529 -530 And in Weinberger v. WiesenfeldSearch
-
Citing cases.) And in Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. MuriaSearch
-
Minnesota v. CloverSearch
-
Hughes v. AlexandriaSearch
-
classification, our analysis necessarily focuses on the suggestions of counsel, see Allied Stores of Ohio, Inc. v. BowersSearch
-
J., dissenting). But where the lawmakers' purposes in enacting a statute are explicitly set forth, e.g., Minnesota v. CloverSearch
-
supra at 416 U. S. 376 , or are clearly discernible from the legislative history, e.g., Hughes v. AlexandriaSearch
-
this Court should not take -- and, with the possible exception of United States Railroad Retirement Board v. FritzSearch
-
Jungersen v. OstbySearch
-
as imposing some limitations on the States as well, even in the absence of any action by Congress. See Philadelphia v. NewSearch
-
Huron Portland Cement Co. v. DetroitSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Kassel v. ConsolidatedSearch
-
See Raymond Motor Transportation, Inc. v. RiceSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial