State v. American Civil Liberties Union
Alaska Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MATTHEWS, Justice.
Under the ripeness doctrine, the constitutionality of a statute generally may not be challenged as an abstract proposition. The plaintiffs in the present case have brought a pre-enforeement challenge to a newly amended statute that prohibits the possession and use of marijuana. They claim that because the statute criminalizes the use by adults of small amounts of marijuana in their homes it violates their privacy rights as interpreted in Ravin v. State.1 The question addressed in this opinion is whether the general bar on abstract adjudication should apply. The…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- City of Los Angeles v. LyonsSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Regional Rail Reorganization Act CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Gonzales v. RaichSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Ravin v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1975
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by44 opinions
- State v. Planned Parenthood of the Great NorthwestAlaska Supreme Court · 2019
- Nelson v. Municipality of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 2011
- State v. Native Village of TananaAlaska Supreme Court · 2011
- Kanuk Ex Rel. Kanuk v. State, Department of Natural ResourcesAlaska Supreme Court · 2014
- Kyle S. v. State, Dept. of Health & Social Services, Office of Children's ServicesAlaska Supreme Court · 2013
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.