Citation network
Shaw Vs. Hunt
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 13, 1996
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. 899 (1996) October Term, 1995 Syllabus Shaw Et Al. V. HuntSearch
-
Earlier in this suit, in Shaw v. RenoSearch
-
that they personally were assigned to their voting districts on the basis of race, lack standing. See United States v. HaysSearch
-
Miller v. JohnsonSearch
-
Together with No. 94-924, Pope et al. v. HuntSearch
-
liability, see, e. g., Thornburg v. GinglesSearch
-
t CHIEF JUSTICE REHNQUIST delivered the opinion of the Court. This suit is here for a second time. In Shaw v. RenoSearch
-
for the Civil Rights Division as defendants. The District Court granted the federal officials' motion to dismiss, Shaw v. BarrSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
As a preliminary matter, appellees challenge appellants' standing to continue this lawsuit. In United States v. HaysSearch
-
live in District 12 and thus have standing to challenge that part of Chapter 7 which defines District 12. See Miller v. JohnsonSearch
-
we conclude that only Shaw and Shimm have standing and only with respect to District 12.2 We explained in Miller v. JohnsonSearch
-
Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. PenaSearch
-
disagreement is more with the Court's prior decisions in Shaw I, 509 U. S. 630 (1993), United States v. HaysSearch
-
U. S. 737 (1995), and Miller v. JohnsonSearch
-
urge upon us their view that this finding is not phrased in the same language that we used in our opinion in Miller v. JohnsonSearch
-
Shaw v. BarrSearch
-
Goodman v. LukensSearch
-
Wygant v. JacksonSearch
-
for the discriminatory classification, see Mississippi Univ. for Women v. HoganSearch
-
Post, at 942. If this were true, however, Miller v. JohnsonSearch
-
the Role of the Justice Department, in B. Grofman & C. Davidson, Controversies in Minority Voting 56 (1992), and Beer v. UnitedSearch
-
period and the objection letters they received from the Civil Rights Division were substantially alike. App. in Miller v. JohnsonSearch
-
Cf. Missouri v. JenkinsSearch
-
quoting Milliken v. BradleySearch
-
U. S. 267 , 280-281 (1977), in turn quoting Milliken v. BradleySearch
-
that is appropriate for oppressive and exclusionary abuses of political power. See, e. g., Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. PenaSearch
-
Cousins v. CitySearch
-
a coherent theory of standing to justify its emerging and misguided race-based districting jurisprudence. See Miller v. JohnsonSearch
-
of their representatives is a matter of concern, but it is obvious that their political identity is critical. See Pope v. BlueSearch
-
do not claim. Counsel for appellees put the matter succinctly when he stated that this case is not Gomillion v. LightfootSearch
-
Such a challenge calls to mind Justice Frankfurter's memorable characterization of the suit brought in Colegrove v. GreenSearch
-
rather than a claim of discriminatory exclusion, Baker v. CarrSearch
-
fact that the State had espoused a racial classification publicly. Id., at 5-6. 923 pause. Cf. Lujan v. DefendersSearch
-
constitutional provision, I do not understand why that provision should be the Equal Protection Clause. In Reynolds v. SimsSearch
-
In addition, in Palmer v. ThompsonSearch
-
Evaluating Election-District Appearances After Shaw v. RenoSearch
-
Lujan v. DefendersSearch
-
s formally equal treatment of its citizens in fact stamps persons of one race with a badge of inferiority. See Bush v. VeraSearch
-
itself. See id., at 641-642.4 Revealed for what it is, the constitu- 4 The Court's decisions in Powers v. OhioSearch
-
U. S. 400 (1991), and Batson v. KentuckySearch
-
review. The majority ignores these concerns and simply applies the standing test set forth in United States v. HaysSearch
-
Syllabus Shaw Et Al. V. HuntSearch
-
See United States v. HaysSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial