"[In RACI ,] we made clear that actual proof of an asserted justification was not necessary, but the court would not simply accept it at face value and would examine it to determine whether it was credible as opposed to specious."
How later courts described this case
- "[In RACI ,] we made clear that actual proof of an asserted justification was not necessary, but the court would not simply accept it at face value and would examine it to determine whether it was credible as opposed to specious."
- assuming equal protection plaintiffs were similarly situated because their claims failed on the merits
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
WATERMAN, Justice
(concurring specially).
I concur in the majority’s well-reasoned decision in all respects but one. The majority misses the opportunity to expressly overrule Racing Ass’n of Central Iowa v. Fitzgerald (RACI II), 675 N.W.2d 1 (Iowa 2004). I reiterate my call to expressly overrule RACI II as plainly erroneous for the reasons set forth in my special concurrence in King v. State, 818 N.W.2d 1 , 43 n. 28 (Iowa 2012) (Waterman, J., concurring).