# Sabri v. United States

> Supreme Court of the United States · May 17, 2004 · 541 U.S. 600

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9434611

## Case

- **Full name:** Sabri v. United States
- **Court:** Supreme Court of the United States
- **Decided:** May 17, 2004
- **Citations:** 541 U.S. 600; 124 S. Ct. 1941; 158 L. Ed. 2d 891; 2004 U.S. LEXIS 3384
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Kennedy
- **Judges:** Kennedy, Scalia, Souter, Thomas
- **Cited by:** 405 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9434611

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- explaining that, outside of specific contexts, such as the First Amendment, the Supreme Court has “discouraged” facial overbreadth challenges that assert a “law would be unconstitutionally applied to different parties and different circumstances from those at hand” because suc…
- recognizing the validity of pre-enforcement facial attacks in only a “few settings,” including abortion, based “on the strength of specific reasons weighty enough to overcome [the Supreme Court’s] well-founded reticence” to entertain such attacks generally (citing Stenberg v. …
- stating that “[t]he power to keep a watchful eye on expenditures and on the reliability of those who use public money is bound up with congressional authority to spend in the first place”

## Opinion text

Justice Kennedy,
with whom Justice Scalia joins,
concurring in part.
I join all but Part III of the Court’s opinion. I do not join Part III but do make this comment with reference to it. The Court in Part III does not specifically question the practice we have followed in cases such as United States v. Lopez, 514 U. S. 549 (1995), and United States v. Morrison, 529 U. S. 598 (2000). In those instances the Court did resolve the basic question whether Congress, in enacting the statutes challenged there, had exceeded its legislative power under the Constitution.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9434611. Public record. Not legal advice.