Citation network
Berman Vs. Parker
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Nov 22, 1954
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
- Distinguished
-
U.S. 26 (1954) U.S. Supreme Court Berman v. ParkerSearch
-
U.S. 26 (1954) Berman v. ParkerSearch
-
Columbia includes all the legislative powers which a state may exercise over its affairs. See District of Columbia v. ThompsonSearch
-
to be served by social legislation, whether it be Congress legislating concerning the District of Columbia ( see Block v. HirshSearch
-
U. S. 135 ) or the States legislating concerning local affairs. See Olsen v. NebraskaSearch
-
Lincoln Union v. NorthwesternSearch
-
California State Association v. MaloneySearch
-
whether that power is being exercised for a public purpose is an extremely narrow one. See Old Dominion Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
to municipal affairs. Yet they merely illustrate the scope of the power, and do not delimit it. See Noble State Bank v. HaskellSearch
-
project is or is not desirable. The concept of the public welfare is broad and inclusive. See Day-Brite Lighting, Inc. v. MissouriSearch
-
the exercise of eminent domain is clear. For the power of eminent domain is merely the means to the end. See Luxton v. NorthSearch
-
United States v. GettysburgSearch
-
project are for Congress, and Congress alone, to determine once the public purpose has been established. See Luxton v. NorthSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Highland v. RussellSearch
-
that the cycle of decay of the area could be controlled, and the birth of future slums prevented. Cf. Gohld Realty Co. v. HartfordSearch
-
Hunter v. RedevelopmentSearch
-
U. S. 36 tract to complete the integrated plan rests in the discretion of the legislative branch. See Shoemaker v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Berman v. ParkerSearch
-
See District of Columbia v. ThompsonSearch
-
Block v. HirshSearch
-
See Olsen v. NebraskaSearch
-
See Old Dominion Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
TVA v. WelchSearch
-
See Noble State Bank v. HaskellSearch
-
See Day-Brite Lighting, Inc. v. MissouriSearch
-
See Luxton v. NorthSearch
-
Highland v. RussellSearch
-
Cf. Gohld Realty Co. v. HartfordSearch
-
See Shoemaker v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial