Legal Opinion
Students for Sensible Drug Policy Foundation v. Spellings
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Decided April 29, 2008No. 07-1159PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BENTON, Circuit Judge.
Students for Sensible Drug Policy Foundation (“Students”) sued for an injunction and a declaratory judgment that 20 U.S.C. § 1091 (r) is unconstitutional because it violates the Fifth and Eighth Amendments to the United States Constitution. The district court1 dismissed the complaint for *899failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Students for Sensible Drug Policy Found, v. Spellings, 460 F.Supp.2d 1093, 1105 (D.S.D.2006). Students argue the district court erred in dismissing their Fifth Amendment claim because section 1091 (r) violates the Double…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Kennedy v. Mendoza-MartinezSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Kansas v. HendricksSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Flemming v. NestorSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Smith v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Hudson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Charles Brooks Co. v. Georgia-Pacific, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2009
- STUDENTS FOR SENSIBLE DRUG POLICY v. SpellingsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2008
- Charles Brooks Co. v. Georgia-PacificCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2009
- Charles Brooks Co. v. Georgia-Pacific, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2009