Citation network
Monroe Vs. Pape
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Feb 20, 1961
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 167 (1961) U.S. Supreme Court Monroe v. PapeSearch
-
U.S. 167 (1961) Monroe v. PapeSearch
-
Screws v. UnitedSearch
-
Court dismissed the complaint. The Court of Appeals affirmed, 272 F.2d 365, relying on its earlier decision, Stift v. LynchSearch
-
that an individual has by reason of his relation to the central government, not to state governments. United States v. WilliamsSearch
-
U. S. 70 . Cf. United States v. CruikshankSearch
-
Guinn v. UnitedSearch
-
See Douglas v. JeannetteSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Amendment has been made applicable to the States by reason of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Wolf v. ColoradoSearch
-
Elkins v. UnitedSearch
-
it in some capacity, whether they act in accordance with their authority or misuse it. See Home Tel. & Tel. Co. v. LosSearch
-
deprived of constitutional rights, privileges and immunities by an official's abuse of his position. Cf. Williams v. UnitedSearch
-
searches and seizures is no barrier to the present suit in the federal court. We had before us in United States v. ClassicSearch
-
was reaffirmed in Screws v. UnitedSearch
-
consideration. It should be good for more than one day only. We do not have here a situation comparable to Mahnich v. SouthernSearch
-
Id. 325 U. S. 112 -113. We adhered to that view in Williams v. UnitedSearch
-
Screws v. UnitedSearch
-
Hague v. CIOSearch
-
This has been the view of the lower federal courts. Charlton v. CitySearch
-
Hewitt v. CitySearch
-
Cobb v. CitySearch
-
Agnew v. CitySearch
-
Cuiksa v. CitySearch
-
were alleged. See, e.g., Douglas v. CitySearch
-
Holmes v. CitySearch
-
I do not think that this Court's decision in Collins v. HardymanSearch
-
of Title 18, U.S.C., was said by a plurality of the Court in United States v. WilliamsSearch
-
rights arising immediately from the relationship of the individual to the central government. And see United States v. CruikshankSearch
-
S. 206 constitutional sources. See the Civil Rights Cases, 109 U. S. 3 . Compare United States v. WilliamsSearch
-
Screws v. UnitedSearch
-
Douglas v. JeannetteSearch
-
Hague v. CIOSearch
-
To be sure, Screws v. UnitedSearch
-
are imposed by the Due Process Clause upon the States. Palko v. ConnecticutSearch
-
the merit of this constitutional claim is evident. The conception expressed in Wolf v. ColoradoSearch
-
by the agents of government, had informed the decision of the King's Bench two centuries earlier in Entick v. CarringtonSearch
-
enforcement of such a statute would be not only the concept of state action as this Court has developed it, see Nixon v. CondonSearch
-
to protect the rights which the Fourteenth Amendment secures. Cf. United States v. RainesSearch
-
of a designated California law, set forth in the indictment, was held insufficient against a demurrer. United States v. JacksonSearch
-
of awareness of the revolutionary turnabout from what had been established practice. The opinion in United States v. ClassicSearch
-
and the third, Hague v. CIOSearch
-
of state authority. Screws v. UnitedSearch
-
put on the words should not be abandoned or revised. 325 U.S. at 325 U. S. 109 -113. The case of Williams v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial