Citation network
Lockport Vs. Citizens for Community Action
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 07, 1977
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
-
Lockport v. CitizensSearch
-
for Community Action - 430 U.S. 259 (1977) U.S. Supreme Court Lockport v. CitizensSearch
-
for Community Action, 430 U.S. 259 (1977) Town of Lockport v. CitizensSearch
-
under state law is hardly a novel concern of the federal judiciary. It was made clear more than 15 years ago in Baker v. CarrSearch
-
U. S. 186 , that the subject is a justiciable one, and ever since the seminal case of Reynolds v. SimsSearch
-
concluded that the rule of Reynolds v. SimsSearch
-
and applied. The rationale is, at bottom, so simple as to be almost self-evident. Beginning with Reynolds v. SimsSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Lucas v. ColoradoSearch
-
Page 430 U. S. 266 U.S. 73, Swann v. AdamsSearch
-
influence to the constituent groups found to be most affected by the governmental unit's functions. Salyer Land Co. v. TulareSearch
-
groups must still be reasonably precise, as Kramer v. UnionSearch
-
separate majority approval system quite similar to the one at issue in the present case. Cipriano v. CitySearch
-
Phoenix v. KolodziejskiSearch
-
reside within the county -- the District Court's judgment would have to be affirmed under our prior cases. Cipriano v. CitySearch
-
to local subdivisions and the discrete interests that such local governmental units may have qua units. Reynolds v. SimsSearch
-
are sufficient under the Equal Protection Clause to justify the classifications made by New York law. Phoenix v. KolodzieskiSearch
-
Salyer Land Co. v. TulareSearch
-
as constitutionally to require that their votes be aggregated in any referendum to approve annexation. Cf. Hunter v. PittsburghSearch
-
brought an action in the same court to enforce the 1972 Charter as the law of Niagara County. County of Niagara v. NewSearch
-
argue that the District Court should have deferred to the jurisdiction of the state court. Even assuming that Younger v. HarrisSearch
-
divided with respect to what deviations from numerical exactitude are constitutionally permissible. See, e.g., Abate v. MundtSearch
-
to representative elections at the local as well as state level. See, e.g., Avery v. MidlandSearch
-
Hadley v. JuniorSearch
-
Carrington v. RashSearch
-
does not violate the Equal Protection Clause, there being no discrimination against an identifiable class. Gordon v. LanceSearch
-
U. S. 1 . Cf. Hunter v. EricksonSearch
-
of county and town subdivisions in New York, and has allowed considerable deviation from the basic rule of Reynolds v. SimsSearch
-
U. S. 533 , on that ground. Abate v. MundtSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Lockport v. CitizensSearch
-
Town of Lockport v. CitizensSearch
-
Baker v. CarrSearch
-
of Reynolds v. SimsSearch
-
Lucas v. ColoradoSearch
-
Kramer v. UnionSearch
-
Cipriano v. CitySearch
-
Phoenix v. KolodzieskiSearch
-
Cf. Hunter v. PittsburghSearch
-
of Niagara County. County of Niagara v. NewSearch
-
Younger v. HarrisSearch
-
Avery v. MidlandSearch
-
Cf. Hunter v. EricksonSearch
-
Whitcomb v. ChavisSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial