Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Fullilove Vs. Klutznick

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jul 02, 1980

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

74 entries 13 linked 61 unlinked
Show
  1. Oregon Vs. Mitchell US Supreme Court · Dec 21, 1970
  2. Mcdaniel Vs. Barresi US Supreme Court · Apr 20, 1971
  3. Blodgett Vs. Holden US Supreme Court · Nov 21, 1927
  4. United States Vs. Butler US Supreme Court · Jan 06, 1936
  5. Lau Vs. Nichols US Supreme Court · Jan 21, 1974
  6. Albemarle Paper Co. Vs. Moody US Supreme Court · Jun 25, 1975
  7. Fortson Vs. Dorsey US Supreme Court · Jan 18, 1965
    Relied / Followed
  8. Buckley Vs. Valeo US Supreme Court · Jan 30, 1976
  9. California Brewers Assn. Vs. Bryant US Supreme Court · Feb 20, 1980
  10. National League of Cities Vs. Usery US Supreme Court · Jun 24, 1976
  11. Fitzpatrick Vs. Bitzer US Supreme Court · Jun 28, 1976
  12. South Carolina Vs. Katzenbach US Supreme Court · Mar 07, 1966
  13. United States Vs. Raines US Supreme Court · Feb 29, 1960
  14. U.S. 448 (1980) U.S. Supreme Court Fullilove v. Klutznick
    Search
  15. U.S. 448 (1980) Fullilove v. Klutznick
    Search
  16. grants to state and local governments, which is one aspect of the equal protection of the laws. Cf., e.g., Katzenbach v. Morgan
    Search
  17. iv) Thus, the objectives of the MBE provision are within the scope of Congress' Spending Power. Cf. Lau v. Nichols
    Search
  18. fashion. Cf., e.g., Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenberg
    Search
  19. North Carolina Board of Education v. Swann
    Search
  20. by innocent parties is not impermissible. Franks v. Bowman
    Search
  21. objectives and are substantially related to achievement of those objectives, University of California Regents v. Bakke
    Search
  22. a memorandum opinion upholding the validity of the MBE program and denying the injunctive relief sought. Fullilove v. Kreps
    Search
  23. In Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Democratic
    Search
  24. Amendment. The rule is not different when a congressional program raises equal protection concerns. See, e.g., Cleland v. National
    Search
  25. is an independent grant of legislative authority, distinct from other broad congressional powers. Buckley v. Valeo
    Search
  26. to induce governments and private parties to cooperate voluntarily with federal policy. E.g., California Bankers Assn. v. Shultz
    Search
  27. Oklahoma v. CSC
    Search
  28. Helvering v. Davis
    Search
  29. Steward Machine Co. v. Davis
    Search
  30. Commerce Clause to regulate the practices of prime contractors on federally funded public works projects. Katzenbach v. McClung
    Search
  31. Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United
    Search
  32. Franks v. Page
    Search
  33. California Brewers Assn. v. Bryant
    Search
  34. Teamsters v. United
    Search
  35. Griggs v. Duke
    Search
  36. on the reach of the Commerce Power to regulate the actions of state and local governments. National League of Cities v. Usery
    Search
  37. for the power to regulate the procurement practices of state and local grantees of federal funds. Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer
    Search
  38. the equal protection guarantees of the Fourteenth Amendment. In Katzenbach v. Morgan
    Search
  39. or administration of governmental programs. Id. at 384 U. S. 652 -653. Four years later, in Oregon v. Mitchell
    Search
  40. discrimination, even though the use of these tests or devices might have discriminatory effects only. See City of Rome v. United
    Search
  41. encompass state action that has discriminatory impact perpetuating the effects of past discrimination. South Carolina v. Katzenbach
    Search
  42. There are relevant similarities between the MBE program and the federal spending program reviewed in Lau v. Nichols
    Search
  43. National Mutual Insurance Co. v. Tidewater
    Search
  44. program, on its face, to be free of constitutional defects, it must be upheld as within congressional power. Parker v. Levy
    Search
  45. Aptheker v. Secretary
    Search
  46. United States v. Raines
    Search
  47. fashion. In Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg
    Search
  48. attendance assignments were permissible so long as no absolute racial balance of each school was required. In McDaniel v. Barresi
    Search
  49. Citations omitted.) And in North Carolina Board of Education v. Swann
    Search
  50. laws have been violated, an equitable remedy may, in the appropriate case, include a racial or ethnic factor. Franks v. Bowman
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial