N'Da v. Hybl

Nebraska Supreme Court held that statutory requirement that applicant seeking certificate to provide nonemergency medical transport must show the proposed service is required by “public convenience and necessity” does not facially violate state constitutional due process or bans on “special laws” or laws granting “special privileges and immunities.” Also held that that the Nebraska Constitution’s due process and equal protection clauses are coextensive with their federal equivalents, so federal rational basis review applies to substantive due process challenges to economic regulations, not the heightened standard the court had applied in a line of cases from the early 20th century. Because the statute can be applied in a manner that focuses on the public interest and does not “inherently implicate unacceptable protectionist concerns,” the majority reasoned, a facial challenge based on those concerns fails.