Citation network
City of Mobile Vs. Bolden
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 22, 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
-
U.S. 55 (1980) U.S. Supreme Court City of Mobile v. BoldenSearch
-
U.S. 55 (1980) City of Mobile v. BoldenSearch
-
in the sense in which that word was used in Reynolds v. SimsSearch
-
that Gomillion v. LightfootSearch
-
II Although required by general principles of judicial administration to do so, Spector Motor Service, Inc. v. McLaughlinSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Ashwander v. TVASearch
-
racially neutral on its face violates the Fifteenth Amendment only if motivated by a discriminatory purpose. In Guinn v. UnitedSearch
-
that racially discriminatory motivation is a necessary ingredient of a Fifteenth Amendment violation. In Gomillion v. LightfootSearch
-
In Wright v. RockefellerSearch
-
Lassiter v. NorthamptonSearch
-
necessity of showing purposeful discrimination in order to show a Fifteenth Amendment violation. The cases of Smith v. AllwrightSearch
-
U. S. 649 , and Terry v. AdamsSearch
-
that discrimination an abridgment of the right to vote by a State. Since the Texas Democratic Party primary in Smith v. AllwrightSearch
-
U.S. at 446 U. S. 664 . Terry v. AdamsSearch
-
of Negroes from participation in the election process. The appellees have argued in this Court that Smith v. AllwrightSearch
-
and Terry v. AdamsSearch
-
the patent discrimination Page 446 U. S. 65 practiced by a nominally private organization. Terry v. AdamsSearch
-
by anyone. The Fifteenth Amendment does not entail the right to have Negro candidates elected, and neither Smith v. AllwrightSearch
-
nor Terry v. AdamsSearch
-
is not and cannot be that, as such, they depart from apportionment on a population basis in violation of Reynolds v. SimsSearch
-
legislative districts, the Court has consistently held that they are not unconstitutional per se, e.g., White v. RegesterSearch
-
purpose were invidiously to minimize or cancel out the voting potential of racial or ethnic minorities. See White v. RegesterSearch
-
that the group allegedly discriminated against has not elected representatives in proportion to its numbers. White v. RegesterSearch
-
discrimination can there be a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. See Washington v. DavisSearch
-
Page 446 U. S. 67 Arlington Heights v. MetropolitanSearch
-
Personnel Administrator of Mass. v. FeeneySearch
-
U. S. 256 . The Court explicitly indicated in Washington v. DavisSearch
-
just as it does to other claims of racial discrimination. Indeed, the Court's opinion in that case viewed Wright v. RockefellerSearch
-
The rule is the same in other contexts. Wright v. RockefellerSearch
-
Washington v. DavisSearch
-
supra at 426 U. S. 240 . More recently, in Arlington Heights v. MetropolitanSearch
-
Housing Dev. Corp., supra, the Court again relied on Wright v. RockefellerSearch
-
Clause as it has been understood in a variety of other contexts involving alleged racial discrimination. Washington v. DavisSearch
-
Arlington Heights v. MetropolitanSearch
-
Keyes v. SchoolSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court City of Mobile v. BoldenSearch
-
Spector Motor Service, Inc. v. McLaughlinSearch
-
In Guinn v. UnitedSearch
-
In Gomillion v. LightfootSearch
-
Lassiter v. NorthamptonSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial