Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Lyng Vs. Automobile Workers

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Mar 23, 1988

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

65 entries 13 linked 52 unlinked
Show
  1. Harris Vs. Mcrae US Supreme Court · Jun 30, 1980
  2. Naacp Vs. Alabama US Supreme Court · Jun 08, 1959
  3. Maher Vs. Roe US Supreme Court · Jun 20, 1977
    Relied / Followed
  4. Reed Vs. Reed US Supreme Court · Nov 22, 1971
  5. Zobel Vs. Williams US Supreme Court · Jun 14, 1982
  6. Plyler Vs. Doe US Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1982
  7. Shapiro Vs. Thompson US Supreme Court · Apr 21, 1969
  8. Zablocki Vs. Redhail US Supreme Court · Jan 18, 1978
  9. Lyng Vs. Castillo US Supreme Court · Jun 27, 1986
  10. Bowen Vs. Owens US Supreme Court · May 19, 1986
  11. Sherbert Vs. Verner US Supreme Court · Jun 17, 1963
  12. Mathews Vs. Lucas US Supreme Court · Jun 29, 1976
  13. Lindsey Vs. Normet US Supreme Court · Feb 23, 1972
  14. Lyng v. Automobile
    Search
  15. Workers - 485 U.S. 360 (1988) U.S. Supreme Court Lyng v. Automobile
    Search
  16. Workers, 485 U.S. 360 (1988) Lyng v. International
    Search
  17. will have any effect at all. Cf. Lyng v. Castillo
    Search
  18. additional food stamp assistance to strikers simply because the strike has caused a decline in their income. Abood v. Detroit
    Search
  19. requiring this Court to examine appellees' equal protection claims under a heightened standard of review. Zablocki v. Redhail
    Search
  20. based on the associational rights asserted by appellees is foreclosed by the reasoning this Court adopted in Lyng v. Castillo
    Search
  21. NAACP v. Claiborne
    Search
  22. combination of individual workers together in order better to assert their lawful rights. See, e.g., Railroad Trainmen v. Virginia
    Search
  23. has no unconstitutional impact on the right of individuals to associate for various purposes. Lincoln Union v. Northwestern
    Search
  24. Similarly, in Board of Directors of Rotary Int'l v. Rotary
    Search
  25. Regan v. Taxation
    Search
  26. to minimize that result by qualifying the striker for food stamps. In Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory
    Search
  27. appellees' right to express themselves about union matters free of coercion by the Government. Appellees rely on Abood v. Detroit
    Search
  28. Regan, supra, at 461 U. S. 550 , quoting Harris v. McRae
    Search
  29. Department of Agriculture v. Moreno
    Search
  30. Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. Murgia
    Search
  31. Dandridge v. Williams
    Search
  32. about how best to spend money to improve the general welfare is lodged in Congress, rather than the courts. Bowen v. Owens
    Search
  33. Bates v. Little
    Search
  34. even by government actions that do not directly restrict individuals' ability to associate freely. See, e.g., Healy v. James
    Search
  35. Board of Directors of Rotary Int'l v. Rotary
    Search
  36. lacks the specific intent to further any illegal aims that may be promoted by other members of a group. NAACP v. Claiborne
    Search
  37. Appellees rely heavily on Sherbert v. Verner
    Search
  38. that strikers as a class are entitled to special treatment under the Equal Protection Clause. City of Charlotte v. Firefighters
    Search
  39. Hodory, 431 U.S. at 431 U. S. 489 . Department of Agriculture v. Moreno
    Search
  40. Ante at 485 U. S. 370 , quoting Department of Agriculture v. Moreno
    Search
  41. Castro, 429 U. S. 181 , 429 U. S. 185 (1976), quoting Mathews v. Lucas
    Search
  42. Cleburne v. Cleburne
    Search
  43. Plyler v. Doe
    Search
  44. rational basis test. In some cases, the Court found that the legislature's goal was not legitimate. See, e.g., Hooper v. Bernalillo
    Search
  45. the classification employed by the legislature did not rationally further the legislature's goal. See, e.g., Lindsey v. Normet
    Search
  46. classification and the purported legislative goal suggests that the true goal is illegitimate. See, e.g., Cleburne v. Cleburne
    Search
  47. ante at 485 U. S. 373 , quoting Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory
    Search
  48. that such classifications themselves be rational, rather than Page 485 U. S. 377 arbitrary. See Reed v. Reed
    Search
  49. in Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory
    Search
  50. in this one-sided and devastating way amounts to a penalty on strikers, not neutrality. D In Cleburne v. Cleburne
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial