Verhein v. Piper
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
KLAPHAKE, Judge*
Appellant challenges the denial of her application for Minnesota supplemental aid (MSA). After a hearing, respondent-commissioner concluded that Minn. Stat. § 256D.024, subd. 1 (2016), unambiguously conditions appellant's receipt of MSA benefits on submission to random drug testing. The district court concluded on appeal that the drug-testing requirement within section 256D.024, subdivision 1(a), does not violate the doctrine of unconstitutional conditions. On appeal to this court, appellant argues that the commissioner erred in concluding that the statute unambiguously…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Skidmore v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Auer v. RobbinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Christensen v. Harris CountySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2015
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.