Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Caban Vs. Mohammed

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Apr 24, 1979

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

72 entries 13 linked 59 unlinked
Show
  1. Lalli Vs. Lalli US Supreme Court · Dec 11, 1978
  2. Frontiero Vs. Richardson US Supreme Court · May 14, 1973
  3. Weinberger Vs. Wiesenfeld US Supreme Court · Mar 19, 1975
  4. Orr Vs. Orr US Supreme Court · Mar 05, 1979
  5. Stanley Vs. Illinois US Supreme Court · Apr 03, 1972
  6. Mathews Vs. Lucas US Supreme Court · Jun 29, 1976
  7. Gomez Vs. Perez US Supreme Court · Jan 17, 1973
    Relied / Followed
  8. Califano Vs. Webster US Supreme Court · Mar 21, 1977
  9. Schlesinger Vs. Ballard US Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1975
  10. QuilloIn Vs. Walcott US Supreme Court · Jan 10, 1978
  11. Reed Vs. Reed US Supreme Court · Nov 22, 1971
  12. Trimble Vs. Gordon US Supreme Court · Apr 26, 1977
  13. Parham Vs. Hughes US Supreme Court · Apr 24, 1979
    Relied / Followed
  14. U.S. 380 (1979) U.S. Supreme Court Caban v. Mohammed
    Search
  15. U.S. 380 (1979) Caban v. Mohammed
    Search
  16. N.Y.2d 568, 331 N.E.2d 486 (1975), appeal dism'd for want of substantial federal question sub nom. Orsini v. Blasi
    Search
  17. Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Second, appellant contends that this Court's decision in Quilloin v. Walcott
    Search
  18. in order to withstand judicial scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause. Craig v. Boren
    Search
  19. U. S. 190 , 429 U. S. 197 (1976). See also Reed v. Reed
    Search
  20. Clause, it must be shown that the distinction is structured reasonably to further these ends. As we repeated in Reed v. Reed
    Search
  21. the object of the legislation, so that all persons similarly circumstanced shall be treated alike.' Royster Guano Co. v. Virginia
    Search
  22. in gender-based classifications. See Califano v. Goldfarb
    Search
  23. proceedings, he does not contend that he was denied the procedural due process held to be requisite in Stanley v. Illinois
    Search
  24. Corey L. v. Martin
    Search
  25. In rejecting an unmarried father's constitutional claim in Quilloin v. Walcott
    Search
  26. In Orsini v. Blasi
    Search
  27. question was lacking. This was a ruling on the merits, and therefore is entitled to precedential weight. See Hicks v. Miranda
    Search
  28. U. S. 344 (1975). At the same time, however, our decision not to review fully the questions presented in Orsini v. Blasi
    Search
  29. is not entitled to the same deference given a ruling after briefing, argument, and a written opinion. See Edelman v. Jordan
    Search
  30. U. S. 259 , 439 U. S. 274 (1978) (quoting Mathews v. Lucas
    Search
  31. In Quilloin v. Walcott
    Search
  32. to object to the adoption of a child will be conditioned upon his showing that it is in fact his child. Cf. Lalli v. Lalli
    Search
  33. the New York courts terminated his parental rights without first finding him to be unfit to be a parent. See Stanley v. Illinois
    Search
  34. my Brother STEVENS, and see no ultimate merit in the former. A The appellant relies primarily on Stanley v. Illinois
    Search
  35. parent after divorce has some substantive due process right to maintain his or her parental relationship, cf. Smith v. Organization
    Search
  36. may suffice to create in the unwed father parental interests comparable to those of the married father. Cf. Stanley v. Illinois
    Search
  37. the relative capabilities of men and women that are unrelated to any inherent differences between the sexes. Cf. Orr v. Orr
    Search
  38. a person to the place set aside for the group on the basis of an attribute that the person cannot change. Reed v. Reed
    Search
  39. the area covered by the legislation in question, the Equal Protection Clause is not violated. See, e.g., Schlesinger v. Ballard
    Search
  40. U. S. 498 . Cf. San Antonio Independent School Dist. v. Rodriguez
    Search
  41. basis, and, in my view, they do not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. See Schlesinger v. Ballard
    Search
  42. and his natural child is entitled to protection against arbitrary state action as a matter of due process. See Stanley v. Illinois
    Search
  43. those reliance interests unquestionably foreclose retroactive application of this ruling. See Chevron Oil Co. v. Huson
    Search
  44. then the State's interest in facilitating adoption in appropriate cases is unquestionably compelling. See Smith v. Organization
    Search
  45. Weber v. Aetna
    Search
  46. to avoid the conclusion that the classification here is one based on gender. See Los Angeles Dept. of Water & Power v. Manhart
    Search
  47. on his or his children's behalf, and the difficult questions that might be raised by such a challenge, compare Lalli v. Lalli
    Search
  48. U. S. 259 , with Trimble v. Gordon
    Search
  49. See Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth
    Search
  50. Court has frequently noted the difficulty of proving paternity in cases involving illegitimate children. E.g., Trimble v. Gordon
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial