Citation network
Holder Vs. Humanitarian Law Project
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 17, 2010
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
-
Holder v. HumanitarianSearch
-
Law Project - 08-1498 (2010) Syllabus October Term, 2009 Holder V. HumanitarianSearch
-
Babbitt v. FarmSearch
-
Hoffman Estates v. FlipsideSearch
-
United States v. WilliamsSearch
-
s knowledge requirement further reduces any potential for vagueness, see Hill v. ColoradoSearch
-
is beside the point because this litigation does not concern such situations. See Scales v. UnitedSearch
-
States , 367 U. S. 203 , 223. Gentile v. StateSearch
-
with the PKK and the LTTE, however, they cannot prevail in their preenforcement challenge. See Washington State Grange v. WashingtonSearch
-
Brien . Texas v. JohnsonSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Humanitarian Law Project et al. v. HolderSearch
-
Attorney General, et al., also on certiorari to the same court. Holder v. HumanitarianSearch
-
in 1974 with the aim of establishing an independent Kurdish state in southeastern Turkey. Humanitarian Law Project v. RenoSearch
-
Mojahedin Organization of Iran v. DeptSearch
-
Workers , 442 U. S. 289 , 298 (1979) (internal quotation marks omitted). See also MedImmune, Inc. v. GenentechSearch
-
See Babbitt , supra , at 302. See also Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz, P. A. v. UnitedSearch
-
Scales v. UnitedSearch
-
Williams , supra , at 304 (quoting Ward v. RockSearch
-
Hoffman Estates , supra , at 495. That rule makes no exception for conduct in the form of speech. See Parker v. LevySearch
-
see also Papachristou v. JacksonvilleSearch
-
any potential for vagueness, as we have held with respect to other statutes containing a similar requirement. See Hill v. ColoradoSearch
-
Things, Ltd. v. UnitedSearch
-
support statute potentially implicates speech, the statutory terms are not vague as applied to plaintiffs. See Grayned v. CitySearch
-
id. , at 29. And they cite Gentile v. StateSearch
-
See Parker v. LevySearch
-
which means that plaintiffs cannot prevail in their preenforcement challenge. See Washington State Grange v. WashingtonSearch
-
Texas v. JohnsonSearch
-
as a regulation of conduct. That argument runs headlong into a number of our precedents, most prominently Cohen v. CaliforniaSearch
-
the conduct triggering coverage under the statute consists of communicating a message. As we explained in Texas v. JohnsonSearch
-
See Winter v. NaturalSearch
-
to conclusively link all the pieces in the puzzle before we grant weight to its empirical conclusions. See Zemel v. RuskSearch
-
post , at 13 (quoting Whitney v. CaliforniaSearch
-
the mere fact of their associating with the PKK and the LTTE, thereby running afoul of decisions like De Jonge v. OregonSearch
-
and cases in which we have overturned sanctions for joining the Communist Party, see, e.g., Keyishian v. BoardSearch
-
See Humanitarian Law Project v. RenoSearch
-
and n. 8. See, e.g., Giboney v. EmpireSearch
-
terrorism. And I would interpret the statute as normally placing activity of this kind outside its scope. See Crowell v. BensonSearch
-
Ashwander v. TVASearch
-
Humanitarian Law Project v. MukaseySearch
-
Hill v. ColoradoSearch
-
See Scales v. UnitedSearch
-
Gentile v. StateSearch
-
See Washington State Grange v. WashingtonSearch
-
Turkey. Humanitarian Law Project v. RenoSearch
-
Mojahedin Organization of Iran v. DeptSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial