Legal Opinion · Dissent

Doe v. St. Louis Community College

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided July 11, 2017No. ED 104574Published

1DissentLisa Van Amburg, Judge

I agree that the preamble to House Bill 3 is unenforceable. Given that it was the sole impetus for the tuition policy prompting this lawsuit, we should end the inquiry here and direct SLCC to resume its previous practices. Instead, we have been pulled into the weeds of federal immigration and constitutional law in an attempt to interpret a residency regulation heretofore applied without conflict. In respect of judicial restraint, this court should resolve the case in a manner that simply restores the prior interpretation. Fearing the potential implications of the majority result, I must…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Clark v. MartinezSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
  2. Blaske v. Smith & Entzeroth, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1991
  3. Arizona Dream Act Coalition v. Janice BrewerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
  4. L & R Distributing, Inc. v. Missouri Department of RevenueSupreme Court of Missouri · 1975
  5. De Vries v. Regents of the University of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API