similar statute. Id. at 662 n. 3, 113 S.Ct. 2297. 7 .See Citizens for Responsible Gov’t v. Davidson, 236 F.3d 1174, 1182 (10th Cir.2000) ("In general, the repeal of a challenged statute is one of those events that makes it absolutely clear that the allegedly wrongful behavior— here the threat of prosecution under one of the repealed sections — could not reasonably be expected to recur.”) (quotations omitted); D.H.L. Assoc. v. O’Gorman, 199 F.3d 50, 55 (1st Cir.1999) (finding that Diffenderfer establishe 1505, 1510 (9th Cir.1994) ("As a general rule, if a challenged law is repealed or expires, the case becomes moot” except where “it is virtually certain that the repealed law will be reenacted.”); Assoc. Gen. Contractors of Conn., Inc. v. City of New Haven, 41 F.3d 62, 66 (2d Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>); see also Erwin Cheme-rinsky. Federal
holding the aladdins castle exception to the mootness rale inapplicable because the city of new haven had not reenacted the challenged legislation and the court did not foresee that it would holding that legislation which repealed the charter of the city of jacksonville did not violate constitutional provision prohibiting local or special laws which change the charter of a city recognizing the community caretaking exception but holding it inapplicable to justify the police action at issue recognizing the rule and the exception but holding facts did not support claim to exception holding that the court of appeals correctly stated the public policy exception but erroneously concluded that the exception did not apply