Alaskans for a Common Language, Inc. v. Kritz
Alaska Supreme Court
1DissentBryner, Chief Justice
I agree with today's ruling that section .320 of the Official English Initiative is unconstitutional because it violates protected freedoms of speech. But I do not agree that this infirmity can be cured by severing the section's first sentence and giving the remaining language of the section-and the entire initiative as well-a new meaning that conflicts with its plain meaning as originally enacted. Nor do I agree that the court's decision to rewrite section .320 can justify its refusal to recognize and address the obvious overbreadth problems left unresolved in the initiative's remaining…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Arizonans for Official English v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Members of the City Council of Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for VincentSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Davis v. Michigan Department of the TreasurySupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Brockett v. Spokane Arcades, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Allied Chemical & Alkali Workers of America, Local Union No. 1 v. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1971
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.