That possibility provided all the more reason for a bright-line rule, the state's lawyer replied.

The American legal community demanded simple bright-line rules that its members could quickly read, comprehend, and follow.

The purpose of a bright-line rule is to produce predictable and consistent results in its application.

The state then asked the Supreme Court to review what it called a "bright-line rule."

“We couldn’t possibly have offered a bright-line rule,” he says.

Other scholars have challenged the efficacy and clarity of the bright-line rule in practice.

Second-best is to introduce some bright-line rules into this monstrosity.

In most jurisdictions, no bright-line rule exists and the ruling is based on common law precedents.

But the more scenarios the bench offered, the less certain they appeared to offer a bright-line rule in their eventual ruling.

Another approach is to use bright-line rules, which make it harder to cheat through clever reinterpretation.

This kind of fact-specific inquiry does not accommodate bright-line rules, as the Court has repeatedly held.

The bright-line rule announced in Michigan v. Summers has received mixed reception.

One problem with the reasonable person test is it isn't definitive, it is not a bright-line rule.

The Supreme Court has refused to offer a bright-line rule on religious monuments, taking a more case-specific approach.

Don't bother with doctrinaire assertions and bright-line rules.

There is no bright-line rule to determine numerosity, but classes with hundreds of members are generally deemed to be sufficiently numerous.

I propose to fully apply-for the first time ever-those bright-line rules to mobile broadband.

One bright-line rule that was used to determine situs for a time was the residence of the debtor.

Justice Clarence Thomas said “today’s decision is sure to engender more litigation” because “we have left the states without a bright-line rule.”

Finally, the Court notes that even if alternatives to this bright-line rule are available, it is not the Court's role to fashion a new rule.

Over the course of the last three decades, many bright-line rules previously established in U.S. jurisprudence have been replaced with balancing tests.

Over the years, Courts have tried to fashion a simple, bright-line rule for determining whether an Indian's personal property is "situated on a reserve".

Simple bright-line rules make the compliance process easier, both for the regulated and for the regulator.”

The company argued for the bright-line rule that only statistically significant reports of adverse events made such information material, which an uncharacteristically unanimous court rejected.

I'm generally of the view that reporting is a complicated and imperfect practice and not well-suited to bright-line rules."