How To Use Case Law In Alignment with Your Case Example

 How To Use Case Law In Alignment with Your Case Example

My point in the case law is to focusing on pulling specific, applicable language from cases to support an argument, even if the overall case involves a different subject matter like taxes or employment, as long as the principle aligns with your position on occupations, rights, or state regulations. That's a valid approach in legal research and briefing; courts often analogize principles across contexts, and if a case hasn't been overturned, its relevant holdings or dicta can be cited persuasively. You don't need the full opinion, just the pinpoint citation to the key line or paragraph. I'll stick to the cases you referenced (Schware, Sims, and Sherar), provide accurate quotes and contexts based on reliable sources, and explain how you might reference them without needing the entire ruling. I'll also note any discrepancies in the quotes you mentioned for precision.

Schware v. Board of Bar Examiners, 353 U.S. 232 (1957)

This U.S. Supreme Court case involved a denial of bar admission in New Mexico based on alleged moral character issues tied to the applicant's past (e.g., political associations and arrests). The Court reversed, holding that the exclusion violated due process under the Fourteenth Amendment because the reasons lacked a rational connection to fitness for law practice.

• Key Quote for Your Use: "A State cannot exclude a person from the practice of law or from any other occupation in a manner or for reasons that contravene the Due Process or Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment." (From pages 238-239 of the U.S. Reports.)
  • Context: This appears in the Court's discussion of state authority over professional admissions. The opinion affirms that states can set "high standards of qualification" like moral character or legal proficiency, but any exclusion must be rationally tied to an applicant's "fitness or capacity to practice law" and can't be arbitrary or discriminatory (e.g., based on race, religion, or politics). It cites supporting cases like Dent v. West Virginia (upholding reasonable regulations) and contrasts with impermissible ones.
  • How to Reference in Your Argument: If you're arguing against arbitrary state barriers to practicing law (or treating it as an "occupation"), cite this to show that exclusions or requirements must respect due process. For example: "As held in Schware v. Board of Bar Examiners, 353 U.S. 232, 238-39 (1957), a state cannot exclude someone from the practice of law or any occupation in ways that violate the Fourteenth Amendment." This supports viewing law practice as protected from unconstitutional restrictions, even if the case itself is about bar denial, not licensing terminology directly.
  • Note on Your Quote: The phrasing "The practice of law cannot be licensed by any state/State" (attributed to pages 238-239) isn't in the official text, it's likely a paraphrase or from secondary sources interpreting the case. The actual language focuses on exclusion, not outright banning licensing, but the principle can still be analogized to challenge overreaching regulations.

This case remains good law and hasn't been struck down; it's often cited in bar admission disputes.

Sims v. Ahrens, 271 S.W. 720 (Ark. 1925)

This Arkansas Supreme Court case struck down a state occupation tax (a gross receipts tax on earnings) as unconstitutional under the state constitution, arguing it unfairly burdened common occupations without uniform application.

• Key Quote for Your Use: "The practice of law is an occupation of common right." (From the majority opinion, around page 722 in some reports.)
  • Context: The court was analyzing whether occupations like law practice could be taxed in a way that treats them as privileges rather than rights. It distinguished between "common occupations" (inherent rights not subject to arbitrary taxes) and privileges granted by the state. The ruling emphasized that pursuing such occupations is a natural right, protected from unequal taxation, drawing on broader principles of liberty and property under state law.
  • How to Reference in Your Argument: Use this to argue that practicing law is a "common right" not subject to monopolistic or privilege-based controls, even though the case is about taxes, not bar admissions. For instance: "In Sims v. Ahrens, 271 S.W. 720, 722 (Ark. 1925), the court recognized that '[t]he practice of law is an occupation of common right,' supporting the view that it cannot be converted into a regulated privilege without constitutional justification." This can analogize to your point on certificates vs. licenses, as the case critiques treating occupations as state-granted privileges.
  • Note: While this is a state case and old, it's not overruled and is still cited in discussions of occupational rights vs. privileges.

Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F.2d 945 (9th Cir. 1973)

(Note: The citation is often listed as 481 F.2d 945, though some sources reference 946 for the specific page.) This federal appeals case involved a Federal Reserve Bank examiner fired for refusing to answer employer questions about potential conflicts, invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. The court remanded for further proceedings but protected against penalties for constitutional exercises.

• Key Quote for Your Use: "There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of constitutional rights." (From page 946.)
  • Context: The court was addressing whether the firing constituted an impermissible penalty for asserting a constitutional right (here, the Fifth Amendment). It drew on precedents like Spevack v. Klein (protecting attorneys from disbarment for invoking the Fifth) to emphasize that government actions can't punish rights exercises without justification.
  • How to Reference in Your Argument: This is broader and not about law practice specifically, but you can use it to argue against penalties (e.g., fines or jail for unauthorized practice) if tied to a constitutional right like pursuing an occupation. Example: "As stated in Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F.2d 945, 946 (9th Cir. 1973), '[t]here can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of constitutional rights,' which applies to protecting inherent rights like occupational pursuits from state-imposed barriers." Analogize it to your view that statutes penalizing non-bar members infringe on rights.
  • Note: The case hasn't been struck down and is cited in rights-protection contexts, though it's more about employment and self-incrimination than occupations directly.