Citation network
Growe Vs. Emison
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Nov 02, 1992
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. 25 (1992) October Term, 1992 Syllabus Growe, Secretary of State of Minnesota, Et Al. V. EmisonSearch
-
a State, through its legislative or judicial branch, has begun in timely fashion to address the issue. Scott v. GermanoSearch
-
of the Voting Rights Act. The three prerequisites that were identified in Thornburg v. GinglesSearch
-
of the Minnesota Constitution. Cotlow v. GroweSearch
-
essentially the same defendants, raising similar challenges to the congressional and legislative districts. Emison v. GroweSearch
-
group of plaintiffs filed a second action in federal court, again against the Minnesota Secretary of State. Benson v. GroweSearch
-
challenge to both of the District Court's redistricting plans, appellants contend that, under the principles of Scott v. GermanoSearch
-
to the state proceedings (i. e., withhold action until the state proceedings have concluded). See McClellan v. CarlandSearch
-
has been invoked to restrain ongoing state criminal proceedings. See Colorado River Water Conservation Dist. v. UnitedSearch
-
be mooted or presented in a different posture following conclusion of the state-court case. Railroad Comm'n of Texas v. PullmanSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
legislative redistricting proposals available for the District Court's choosing. See Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. LocomotiveSearch
-
to legislative redistricting only to the extent those claims challenged the state court's plan. Cf. Wise v. LipscombSearch
-
for a vote-dilution violation set out by this Court for challenges to multimember districts, see Thornburg v. GinglesSearch
-
district's total minority population, but the district's minority population of voting age. See, e. g., Romero v. PomonaSearch
-
see also Burns v. RichardsonSearch
-
why we have strongly preferred single-member districts for federal-court-ordered reapportionment, see, e. g., Connor v. FinchSearch
-
is the basis for an alleged violation, proof of minority political cohesion is all the more essential. See Badillo v. StocktonSearch
-
Concerned Citizens of Hardee County v. HardeeSearch
-
Campos v. BaytownSearch
-
Syllabus Growe, Secretary of State of Minnesota, Et Al. V. EmisonSearch
-
Scott v. GermanoSearch
-
Emison v. GroweSearch
-
the Minnesota Secretary of State. Benson v. GroweSearch
-
of Scott v. GermanoSearch
-
See McClellan v. CarlandSearch
-
See Colorado River Water Conservation Dist. v. UnitedSearch
-
Railroad Comm'n of Texas v. PullmanSearch
-
See Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. LocomotiveSearch
-
Cf. Wise v. LipscombSearch
-
Romero v. PomonaSearch
-
See Badillo v. StocktonSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial