562:
45:
149:) is a clearly defined rule or standard, composed of objective factors, which leaves little or no room for varying interpretation. The purpose of a bright-line rule is to produce predictable and consistent results in its application. The term "bright-line" in this sense generally occurs in a
229:. When it was introduced a bright-line test was described as, "a term used in law for a clearly-defined rule or standard, using objective factors, which is designed to produce predictable and consistent results."
195:
noted that there are circumstances in which the application of bright-line rules would be inappropriate, stating that "no single set of legal rules can ever capture the ever changing complexity of human life."
275:
185:
542:
191:, have expressed a strong preference for bright-line rules, critics often argue that bright-line rules are overly simplistic and can lead to harsh and unjust results. Supreme Court Justice
522:
409:
390:
364:
345:
318:
299:
280:
209:(1966) may be considered establishing a bright-line rule. The majority opinion in that case required law enforcement agents to give a criminal suspect what is now known as a
264:
184:, there is much scholarly legal debate between those favoring bright-line rules and those favoring balancing tests. While some legal scholars, such as former
172:(or "fine line testing"), where a result depends on weighing several factors—which could lead to inconsistent application of law or reduce objectivity.
495:
359:
591:
165:
128:
62:
109:
434:
81:
66:
271:
implicitly carries with it the limited authority to detain the occupants of the premises while a proper search is conducted.
487:
88:
33:
378:
95:
55:
469:
77:
213:
of their "Miranda" rights when the suspect is in custody, and when the suspect is about to be interrogated.
385:
526:
470:"Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Act 2015 No 111, Public Act – New Zealand Legislation"
413:
394:
368:
349:
322:
303:
284:
459:, 547 U.S. 103, 125, 126 S. Ct. 1515, 1529, 164 L. Ed. 2d 208, 229 (2006) (Breyer, J., concurring).
455:
340:
259:
248:
575:
313:
244:
205:
517:
239:
222:
102:
294:
404:
332:
210:
157:
529:
416:
371:
352:
325:
306:
287:
268:
192:
188:
169:
397:
585:
181:
488:"Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill 59-2 (2015), Government Bill"
561:
226:
44:
17:
567:
557:
221:
The
Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Act 2015 is a form of
252:
217:
New
Zealand - Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Act 2015
161:
156:
Bright-line rules are usually standards established by courts in
150:
38:
29:
Judicial test using clearly defined and objective factors
267:
purposes, a warrant to search for contraband founded on
168:
often contrasts bright-line rules with their opposite:
578:
Discussion of the phrase, with examples and history
69:. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
32:"Bright line" redirects here. For other uses, see
543:"Goldberg v. Kelly | Case Brief for Law Students"
8:
255:benefits can be deprived of such benefits.
233:Notable cases containing bright-line rules
251:before a recipient of certain government
129:Learn how and when to remove this message
447:
360:Bowen v. Georgetown University Hospital
498:from the original on November 27, 2015
7:
67:adding citations to reliable sources
25:
560:
43:
54:needs additional citations for
435:District of Columbia v. Heller
1:
336:, 183 N.W.2d 657 (Iowa 1971)
34:Bright line (disambiguation)
428:following bright-line rules
379:Evans v. the United Kingdom
608:
592:American legal terminology
31:
492:www.legislation.govt.nz
245:due process requirement
386:Kyllo v. United States
243:(1970) ruled that the
160:or by legislatures in
263:(1981) held that for
186:Supreme Court Justice
276:SEC v. Chenery Corp.
162:statutory provisions
63:improve this article
545:. October 30, 2017.
474:legislation.govt.nz
456:Georgia v. Randolph
341:Heckler v. Campbell
260:Michigan v. Summers
249:evidentiary hearing
314:Miranda v. Arizona
206:Miranda v. Arizona
78:"Bright-line rule"
518:Goldberg v. Kelly
240:Goldberg v. Kelly
223:Capital Gains Tax
139:
138:
131:
113:
16:(Redirected from
599:
570:
565:
564:
547:
546:
539:
533:
514:
508:
507:
505:
503:
484:
478:
477:
466:
460:
452:
295:Aguilar v. Texas
265:Fourth Amendment
176:Debate in the US
166:US Supreme Court
147:bright-line test
143:bright-line rule
134:
127:
123:
120:
114:
112:
71:
47:
39:
21:
18:Bright line rule
607:
606:
602:
601:
600:
598:
597:
596:
582:
581:
566:
559:
556:
551:
550:
541:
540:
536:
515:
511:
501:
499:
486:
485:
481:
468:
467:
463:
453:
449:
444:
430:
405:Arizona v. Gant
333:Katko v. Briney
235:
225:legislation in
219:
211:Miranda warning
202:
178:
170:balancing tests
158:legal precedent
135:
124:
118:
115:
72:
70:
60:
48:
37:
30:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
605:
603:
595:
594:
584:
583:
580:
579:
572:
571:
555:
554:External links
552:
549:
548:
534:
509:
479:
461:
446:
445:
443:
440:
439:
438:
429:
424:Notable cases
422:
421:
420:
401:
382:
375:
356:
337:
329:
310:
291:
272:
269:probable cause
256:
234:
231:
218:
215:
201:
198:
193:Stephen Breyer
189:Antonin Scalia
177:
174:
137:
136:
51:
49:
42:
28:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
604:
593:
590:
589:
587:
577:
574:
573:
569:
563:
558:
553:
544:
538:
535:
531:
528:
524:
520:
519:
513:
510:
497:
493:
489:
483:
480:
475:
471:
465:
462:
458:
457:
451:
448:
441:
437:
436:
432:
431:
427:
423:
418:
415:
411:
407:
406:
402:
399:
396:
392:
388:
387:
383:
381:
380:
376:
373:
370:
366:
362:
361:
357:
354:
351:
347:
343:
342:
338:
335:
334:
330:
327:
324:
320:
316:
315:
311:
308:
305:
301:
297:
296:
292:
289:
286:
282:
278:
277:
273:
270:
266:
262:
261:
257:
254:
250:
246:
242:
241:
237:
236:
232:
230:
228:
224:
216:
214:
212:
208:
207:
199:
197:
194:
190:
187:
183:
182:United States
175:
173:
171:
167:
163:
159:
154:
152:
148:
144:
133:
130:
122:
119:December 2019
111:
108:
104:
101:
97:
94:
90:
87:
83:
80: –
79:
75:
74:Find sources:
68:
64:
58:
57:
52:This article
50:
46:
41:
40:
35:
27:
19:
576:Language Log
537:
532: (1970).
516:
512:
500:. Retrieved
491:
482:
473:
464:
454:
450:
433:
425:
403:
384:
377:
358:
339:
331:
312:
293:
274:
258:
247:requires an
238:
220:
204:
203:
179:
155:
146:
142:
140:
125:
116:
106:
99:
92:
85:
73:
61:Please help
56:verification
53:
26:
419: (2009)
400: (2001)
374: (1988)
355: (1983)
328: (1966)
309: (1964)
290: (1947)
227:New Zealand
568:Law portal
442:References
89:newspapers
153:context.
586:Category
502:June 23,
496:Archived
200:Examples
253:welfare
180:In the
103:scholar
521:,
164:. The
105:
98:
91:
84:
76:
525:
412:
393:
367:
348:
321:
302:
283:
151:legal
110:JSTOR
96:books
527:U.S.
504:2021
414:U.S.
395:U.S.
369:U.S.
350:U.S.
323:U.S.
304:U.S.
285:U.S.
145:(or
82:news
530:254
523:397
426:not
417:332
410:556
391:533
372:204
365:488
353:458
346:461
326:436
319:384
307:108
300:378
288:194
281:332
65:by
588::
494:.
490:.
472:.
408:,
398:27
389:,
363:,
344:,
317:,
298:,
279:,
141:A
506:.
476:.
132:)
126:(
121:)
117:(
107:·
100:·
93:·
86:·
59:.
36:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
