However, we do not simply accept the State’s invocation of a special need.

“However, we do not simply accept the State’s invocation of a “special need.” Instead, we carry out a “close review” of the scheme at issue before concluding that the need in question was not “special” as the term has been defined in our cases.” (Justice Stevens, Ferguson v. City of Charleston)

QUESTION: Given the facts of the case of Ferguson v. City of Charleston, do you agree with Justice Stevens “that the need in question was not ‘special’ as he, referring to earlier cases, defined the term?