Citation network
Carr Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 24, 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
-
Carr v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 08-1301 (2010) Syllabus October Term, 2009 Carr V. UnitedSearch
-
reinforces this conclusion. See, e.g. , United States v. WilsonSearch
-
Gwaltney of Smithfield, Ltd. v. ChesapeakeSearch
-
s coverage of federal v. stateSearch
-
in the judgment. Alito, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Thomas and Ginsburg, JJ., joined. Carr v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 08-1301 (2010) Opinion of the Court Carr V. UnitedSearch
-
Supreme Court of the United States No. 08-1301 Thomas Carr, Petitioner V. UnitedSearch
-
F. 3d, at 582 (citing Scarborough v. UnitedSearch
-
s decision in United States v. HustedSearch
-
s temporal reach. See, e.g. , United States v. WilsonSearch
-
Barrett v. UnitedSearch
-
s registration requirements by traveling in interstate commerce. Cf. Mertens v. HewittSearch
-
in an absurdity that would compel us to disregard the statutory text. Cf. Arlington Central School Dist. Bd. of Ed. v. MurphySearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
g), and applied it to a sex offender who traveled before SORNA became applicable to him. United States v. DumontSearch
-
United States v. MaySearch
-
Fed. Reg. 8897, on February 28, 2007. See, e.g. , United States v. HatcherSearch
-
United States v. CainSearch
-
United States v. MaderaSearch
-
United States v. HinckleySearch
-
to the notice-and-comment and publication requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)), with United States v. DeanSearch
-
United States v. GouldSearch
-
F. 3d, at 583 (quoting Coalition for Clean Air v. SouthernSearch
-
United States v. JacksonSearch
-
s enactment. See Johnson v. UnitedSearch
-
type of registration system. Smith v. DoeSearch
-
presumably as redundant in light of the sequential structure of the enacted statute. Carr v. UnitedSearch
-
citations and internal quotation marks omitted). Carr v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 08-1301 (2010) Alito, J., Dissenting Carr V. UnitedSearch
-
In response, Congress and state legislatures passed laws requiring the registration of sex offenders. See Smith v. DoeSearch
-
s enactment. See United States v. HinckleySearch
-
s regulation. See, e.g. , United States v. CainSearch
-
United States v. HatcherSearch
-
interpretation that statutes must be interpreted in context. See, e.g. , United States Nat. Bank of Ore. v. IndependentSearch
-
pre-SORNA sex-offense convictions. For essentially the reasons explained by the Court of Appeals, see United States v. DixonSearch
-
United States v. WilsonSearch
-
Opinion of the Court Carr V. UnitedSearch
-
Thomas Carr, Petitioner V. UnitedSearch
-
Scarborough v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. HustedSearch
-
Cf. Mertens v. HewittSearch
-
Cf. Arlington Central School Dist. Bd. of Ed. v. MurphySearch
-
United States v. DumontSearch
-
United States v. DeanSearch
-
Clean Air v. SouthernSearch
-
See Johnson v. UnitedSearch
-
Smith v. DoeSearch
-
Alito, J., Dissenting Carr V. UnitedSearch
-
See Smith v. DoeSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial