Also known as:as-applied challenge · as applied challenge · as applied challenges · as-applied · as applied
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A method of constitutional attack in which a party contends that a statute or regulation violates the Constitution solely in its application to the party's own facts rather than in all possible applications. The challenger must demonstrate that the law produces an unconstitutional result when enforced against the specific conduct or circumstances at issue. Success invalidates the law only as to that party and leaves the statute intact for other situations.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
6
Zoning Restriction On Parcel Use
Arthur Abrams owns a corner lot in a residential zone. He applies for a permit to build a small commercial structure that would generate rental income. City officials deny the permit under the zoning ordinance. Abrams sues, arguing that the ordinance as enforced against his particular parcel bears no substantial relation to public health or safety and arbitrarily strips him of beneficial use. The court examines the ordinance's application to his land alone and grants relief limited to that parcel.
Trust Revocability Determination
Abigail Alvarez creates a trust funded with her personal assets and later seeks to revoke it without trustee consent. The trustee objects, claiming an adverse interest blocks revocation. Alvarez files suit asserting that the statute governing trust revocation violates due process as applied to her situation because she retains sole power to revoke without needing consent from anyone holding an adverse interest. The court resolves the dispute by applying the constitutional standard only to her trust instrument and her status as settlor.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cases
Uniform Acts
Model Codes
Restatements
Casebooks
Course Outlines
Study Supplements
Director Qualification Bylaw
Aisha Ahmed nominates herself for the board of Alliance Holdings. The bylaws require nominees to have served as an officer within the prior five years. Ahmed challenges the bylaw as applied to her candidacy, contending that the qualification violates equal protection when measured against her actual experience and the corporation's needs. The court assesses the bylaw's constitutional validity solely in the context of her nomination and the company's circumstances.
Agency Rulemaking Procedure
Aaron Adams operates a nuclear facility subject to new licensing rules issued by an agency. He petitions for review, claiming the rules were adopted without adequate procedures when applied to his plant's unique operational history. The court evaluates whether the agency's process satisfied statutory requirements only as applied to Adams's license application rather than striking the rules in their entirety.
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc.467 U.S. 837, 843, 104 S. Ct. 2778, 2781, 81 L. Ed. 2d 694 (1984)
Zoning Classification Challenge
Anita Ali purchases land previously used for agriculture. The village applies a residential zoning classification that prevents her planned industrial development. Ali sues, asserting that the classification as enforced against her parcel lacks a substantial relation to public welfare and deprives her of reasonable use. The court scrutinizes the ordinance's application to her specific property and grants targeted relief.
Village of Euclid Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co.272 U.S. 365, 47 S.Ct. 114, 71 L.Ed 303 (1926)
Defamation Liability Standard
Anthony Arnold publishes an editorial criticizing a public official. The official sues for defamation under state common law. Arnold defends by arguing that the actual-malice standard must govern the claim as applied to his speech because the publication addressed a matter of public concern. The court determines whether the First Amendment limits liability only in the context of this particular publication and speaker.
New York Times v. Sullivan376 U.S. 254 (1964)
Common questions
Frequently Asked
3
How does an as-applied challenge differ from a facial challenge?+
An as-applied challenge attacks a law only as enforced against the challenger's own facts and seeks relief limited to that party. A facial challenge seeks to invalidate the law in all applications. Courts prefer as-applied challenges when the facts permit because they avoid unnecessary invalidation of statutes.
Supporting sources
When may a party bring an as-applied challenge to a disclosure requirement?+
A party may bring an as-applied challenge to a disclosure requirement by showing a reasonable probability that compelled disclosure will subject contributors to threats, harassment, or reprisals. If that showing succeeds, the requirement cannot be enforced against that party even if it remains valid in other contexts.
Supporting sources
Can an as-applied challenge succeed against a voter-identification law?+
Yes. Although facial challenges to voter-identification laws have been rejected, as-applied challenges have succeeded in several states when the law imposes severe burdens on particular voters without adequate justification. The court examines the burden on the specific plaintiffs rather than the law's general operation.
Supporting sources
410 U.S. 113 (1973)Constitutional Law
…impose these selfsame statutory limitations on abortion. My understanding of past practice is that a statute found to be invalid as applied to a particular plaintiff, but not unconstitutional as a whole, is not simply "struck down" but is, instead, declared unconstitutional as applied to the fact situation before the Court.…