Citation network
Hill Vs. Stone
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 12, 1975
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
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 289 (1975) U.S. Supreme Court Hill v. StoneSearch
-
U.S. 289 (1975) Hill v. StoneSearch
-
stand unless the district or State can demonstrate that the classification serves a compelling state interest. Kramer v. UnionSearch
-
Cipriano v. CitySearch
-
where the debt services will be paid entirely out of property taxes, is a matter of general interest. City of Phoenix v. KolodziejskiSearch
-
any compelling state interest, and therefore violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Stone v. StovallSearch
-
In 1969, after our decisions in Kramer v. UnionSearch
-
Free School District No. 1, 395 U. S. 621 (1969), and Cipriano v. CtySearch
-
property for taxation, even if he did not actually pay any tax on the property, Montgomery Independent School District v. MartinSearch
-
to a requirement of property ownership, which he concluded was impermissible under this Court's decision in Harper v. VirginiaSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
concurred in the judgment, but only because he thought the case was controlled by our decision in City of Phoenix v. KolodziejskiSearch
-
classification that it does create is reasonable, and should be upheld on that basis. A In Kramer v. UnionSearch
-
the class of persons interested in the conduct of local school affairs. Page 421 U. S. 296 In Cipriano v. CitySearch
-
revenue bonds through the utility rates they would be required to pay. The next Term, in City of Phoenix v. KolodziejskiSearch
-
interest, and thus outside the principles of the Kramer case, runs afoul of our decision in City of Phoenix v. KolodziejskiSearch
-
to compel compliance with other, independent state objectives is questionable in any context. See United States v. TexasSearch
-
We answered that question in Salyer Land Co. v. TulareSearch
-
See Stewart v. ParishSearch
-
requirement for membership on county boards of education. Turner v. FoucheSearch
-
Appellant relies on this Court's decisions in McDonald v. BoardSearch
-
of Election, 394 U. S. 802 (1969), and Rosario v. RockefellerSearch
-
of Phoenix, Ariz. et al. as Amici Curiae 19. In addition to the 13 States referred to in City of Phoenix v. KolodziejskiSearch
-
Montgomery Independent School District v. MartinSearch
-
Dubose v. AinsworthSearch
-
before the election of any item of property qualifies, even though untimely under the rendering statutes, Markowsky v. NewmanSearch
-
and the absence of adequate facilities for the rendering of property eliminates the rendition requirement. Hanson v. JordanSearch
-
Green v. StienkeSearch
-
of a rendering cattle baron. Not surprisingly, the Texas Supreme Court, in Montgomery Independent School District v. MartinSearch
-
equality which invalidates classifications without examination of the circumstances surrounding them, Tigner v. TexasSearch
-
of the classification challenged as denying equal protection and the individual interests affected by it. Williams v. RhodesSearch
-
only where restrictions have a real and appreciable impact on ability to exercise the franchise. See McDonald v. BoardSearch
-
Kramer v. UnionSearch
-
U. S. 134 , 405 U. S. 144 (1972). In Rosario v. RockefellerSearch
-
constitutional dialogue is somewhat less than edifying, and may be traced in part to the dichotomy drawn by Kramer v. UnionSearch
-
such as non-real property owners, and thereby constitutes a genuine burden on the franchise. Cf. City of Phoenix v. KolodziejskiSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Hill v. StoneSearch
-
the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Stone v. StovallSearch
-
and Cipriano v. CtySearch
-
Harper v. VirginiaSearch
-
A In Kramer v. UnionSearch
-
In Cipriano v. CitySearch
-
See United States v. TexasSearch
-
Salyer Land Co. v. TulareSearch
-
McDonald v. BoardSearch
-
and Rosario v. RockefellerSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial