Citation network
Washington Vs. Davis
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 07, 1976
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. 229 (1976) U.S. Supreme Court Washington v. DavisSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
U.S. 229 (1976) Washington v. DavisSearch
-
in favor of respondents, having applied to the constitutional issue the statutory standards enunciated in Griggs v. DukeSearch
-
of the Fifth Amendment. The Court of Appeals, addressing that issue, announced that it would be guided by Griggs v. DukeSearch
-
component prohibiting the United States from invidiously discriminating between individuals or groups. Bolling v. SharpeSearch
-
is unconstitutional solely because it has a racially disproportionate impact. Almost 100 years ago, Strauder v. WestSearch
-
Alexander v. LouisianaSearch
-
U. S. 625 , 405 U. S. 628 -629 (1972). See also Carter v. JurySearch
-
U. S. 463 , 332 U. S. 468 -469 (1947). The rule is the same in other contexts. Wright v. RockefellerSearch
-
Keyes v. SchoolSearch
-
U. S. 535 , 406 U. S. 548 (1972). And compare Hunter v. EricksonSearch
-
U. S. 385 (1969), with James v. ValtierraSearch
-
otherwise neutral on its face, must not be applied so as invidiously to discriminate on the basis of race. Yick Wo v. HopkinsSearch
-
supra at 325 U. S. 404 . Smith v. TexasSearch
-
jury combined with the failure of the jury commissioners to be informed of eligible Negro jurors in a community, Hill v. TexasSearch
-
U. S. 400 , 316 U. S. 404 (1942), or with racially nonneutral selection procedures, Alexander v. LouisianaSearch
-
Alexander, supra at 405 U. S. 632 . See also Turner v. FoucheSearch
-
racial discrimination forbidden by the Constitution. Standing alone, it does not trigger the rule, McLaughlin v. FloridaSearch
-
only by the weightiest of considerations. There are some indications to the contrary in our cases. In Palmer v. ThompsonSearch
-
less invalidate, a statute or ordinance having neutral purposes but disproportionate racial consequences. Wright v. CouncilSearch
-
Ibid. Citing Palmer v. ThompsonSearch
-
That neither Palmer nor Wright was understood to have changed the prevailing rule is apparent from Keyes v. SchoolSearch
-
discrimination resulting in a partially or wholly segregated school system. Nor did other later cases, Alexander v. LouisianaSearch
-
supra, and Jefferson v. HackneySearch
-
Both before and after Palmer v. ThompsonSearch
-
Nor is the Page 426 U. S. 251 conclusion foreclosed by either Griggs or Albemarle Paper Co. v. MoodySearch
-
by Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. 54(b). The promotion issue was subsequently decided adversely to the original plaintiffs. Davis v. WashingtonSearch
-
Griggs and Title VII standards in resolving this case, petitioners presented issues going only to whether Griggs v. DukeSearch
-
Silber v. UnitedSearch
-
Carpenters v. UnitedSearch
-
Sibbach v. WilsonSearch
-
Weems v. UnitedSearch
-
very shortly after Palmer, all Members of the Court majority in that case joined the Court's opinion in Lemon v. KurtzmanSearch
-
Chance v. BoardSearch
-
Castro v. BeecherSearch
-
Bridgeport Guardians v. BridgeportSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial