Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Holtzman Vs. Schlesinger

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Aug 01, 1973

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

43 entries 2 linked 41 unlinked
Show
  1. Talbot Vs. Seeman US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1801
  2. English Vs. Cunningham US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1959
  3. U.S. 1304 (1973) U.S. Supreme Court Holtzman v. Schlesinger
    Search
  4. U.S. 1304 (1973) Holtzman v. Schlesinger
    Search
  5. Mitchell v. Laird
    Search
  6. Orlando v. Laird
    Search
  7. F.2d 1039, 1042 (CA2 1971). Cf. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer
    Search
  8. There is, to be sure, no doubt that I have the power, as a single Circuit Justice, to dissolve the stay. See Meredith v. Fair
    Search
  9. with the greatest of caution, and should be reserved for exceptional circumstances. Cf. Aberdeen & Rockfish R. Co. v. SCRAP
    Search
  10. on which side the risk of irreparable injury weighs most heavily. See, e.g., Long Beach Federal Sav. & Loan Assn. v. Federal
    Search
  11. Board of Education v. Taylor
    Search
  12. Socialist Labor Party v. Rhodes
    Search
  13. stayed where it is likely that four Members of this Court would vote to grant a writ of certiorari. See, e.g., Edwards v. New
    Search
  14. Appalachian Power Co. v. American
    Search
  15. McGee v. Eyman
    Search
  16. likely be impossible to preserve this controversy in its present form for ultimate review by this Court. Cf. O'Brien v. Brown
    Search
  17. when the losing party presents substantial contentions which are likely to prevail on the merits. See, e.g., O'Brien v. Brown
    Search
  18. Rosenberg v. United
    Search
  19. Railway Express Agency v. United
    Search
  20. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Brotherhood
    Search
  21. ongoing war may present political questions which the federal courts lack jurisdiction to decide, see, e.g., DaCosta v. Laird
    Search
  22. may lack the power to dictate the form which congressional assent to war-making must take, see, e.g., Massachusetts v. Laird
    Search
  23. war-making, and that these standards are sufficient to make controversies concerning them justiciable. See Mitchell v. Laird
    Search
  24. DaCosta v. Laird
    Search
  25. Berk v. Laird
    Search
  26. years since those words were written alters that fundamental constitutional postulate. Cf. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer
    Search
  27. a heavy responsibility to conscientiously reflect the views of his Brethren as best he perceives them, cf. Meredith v. Fair
    Search
  28. own jurisdiction, is entitled to great weight. See, e.g., Page 414 U. S. 1315 United States ex rel. Knauff v. McGrath
    Search
  29. Breswick & Co. v. United
    Search
  30. New York Times Co. v. United
    Search
  31. lies in this dispute, as courts traditionally do when determining the appropriateness of a stay. See, e.g., O'Brien v. Brown
    Search
  32. U.S. Supreme Court Holtzman v. Schlesinger
    Search
  33. Cf. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer
    Search
  34. See Meredith v. Fair
    Search
  35. Cf. Aberdeen & Rockfish R. Co. v. SCRAP
    Search
  36. Long Beach Federal Sav. & Loan Assn. v. Federal
    Search
  37. Edwards v. New
    Search
  38. Court. Cf. O'Brien v. Brown
    Search
  39. O'Brien v. Brown
    Search
  40. Massachusetts v. Laird
    Search
  41. See Mitchell v. Laird
    Search
  42. Meredith v. Fair
    Search
  43. Knauff v. McGrath
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial