Citation network
Flast Vs. Cohen
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 10, 1968
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
- Distinguished
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
U.S. 83 (1968) U.S. Supreme Court Flast v. CohenSearch
-
U.S. 83 (1968) Flast v. CohenSearch
-
and requested the convening of a three-judge court. A three-judge court ruled, on the authority of Frothingham v. MellonSearch
-
against the abuse of legislative power, i.e., the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Frothingham v. MellonSearch
-
Page 392 U. S. 85 MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WARREN delivered the opinion of the Court. In Frothingham v. MellonSearch
-
lacked standing to maintain the action. District Judge Frankel, who considered the motion, recognized that Frothingham v. MellonSearch
-
The decision in Zemel v. RuskSearch
-
The Court noted in Zemel v. RuskSearch
-
U.S. at 381 U. S. 6 . See also Florida Lime Growers v. JacobsenSearch
-
Allen v. GrandSearch
-
a litigant asserting only his status as a taxpayer has standing to maintain a suit in a federal court in Frothingham v. MellonSearch
-
to the practices of the courts of Westminster when the Constitution was adopted. Joint Anti-Fascist Committee v. McGrathSearch
-
prescribed by the Constitution and confines federal courts to the role assigned them by Article III. See Muskrat v. UnitedSearch
-
U. S. 249 , 346 U. S. 255 (1953). For example, in his concurring opinion in Ashwander v. TennesseeSearch
-
the rules of self-governance articulated purely constitutional grounds for decision. See, e.g., Massachusetts v. MellonSearch
-
Chicago & Grand Trunk R. Co. v. WellmanSearch
-
Aetna Life Insurance Co. v. HaworthSearch
-
more general than, the rule that federal courts will not entertain friendly suits, Chicago & Grand Trunk R. Co. v. WellmanSearch
-
supra, or those which are feigned or collusive in nature, United States v. JohnsonSearch
-
upon whether the party raises an Establishment Clause claim or a claim under the Free Exercise Clause. See McGowan v. MarylandSearch
-
This requirement is consistent with the limitation imposed upon state-taxpayer standing in federal courts in Doremus v. BoardSearch
-
The allegations of the taxpayer in Frothingham v. MellonSearch
-
our jurisdiction on direct appeal, the lateness of the claim is irrelevant to our consideration of it. United States v. GriffinSearch
-
a three-judge court is that the constitutional question presented be substantial. See Idlewild Bon Voyage Liquor Corp. v. EpsteinSearch
-
of the constitutional attack made by appellants on the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. See Flast v. GardnerSearch
-
the Court accepted jurisdiction in taxpayer suits without passing directly on the standing question. Wilson v. ShawSearch
-
Commercial Trust Co. v. MillerSearch
-
United States v. FruehaufSearch
-
Muskrat v. UnitedSearch
-
California v. SanSearch
-
Tileston v. UllmanSearch
-
Frothingham v. MellonSearch
-
and Public Papers of John Jay 486-489 (1891), and the rule has been adhered to without deviation. See United States v. FruehaufSearch
-
palpably unconstitutional conduct as providing funds for the construction of churches for particular sects. See Flast v. GardnerSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial