Citation network
Olmstead Vs. L. C.
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 22, 1999
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
-
warrant respect. This Court need not inquire whether the degree of deference described in Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. NaturalSearch
-
of experience and informed judgment to which courts and litigants may properly resort for guidance. E. g., Bragdon v. AbbottSearch
-
assumptions that persons so isolated are incapable or unworthy of participating in community life, cf., e. g., Allen v. WrightSearch
-
for 58 Former State Commissioners and Directors of Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities et al. by Neil V. McKittrickSearch
-
the courts below resolved the case solely on statutory grounds. Our review is similarly confined. Cf. Cleburne v. CleburneSearch
-
see 138 F.3d 893 , 895, n. 2 (CAll 1998) (citing Honig v. DoeSearch
-
U. S. 305 , 318-323 (1988), and Vitek v. JonesSearch
-
Brief for United States as Amicus Curiae in Helen L. v. DiDarioSearch
-
has consistently advocated that it does.9 Because the Department 9 See Brief for United States in Halderman v. PennhurstSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
views warrant respect. We need not inquire whether the degree of deference described in Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. NaturalSearch
-
U. S. 624, 642 (1998) (quoting Skidmore v. SwiftSearch
-
Brief for United States in Halderman v. PennhurstSearch
-
see also Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. HaldermanSearch
-
post, at 618. The dissent is incorrect as a matter of precedent and logic. See O'Connor v. ConsolidatedSearch
-
cf. Oncale v. SundownerSearch
-
Jefferies v. HarrisSearch
-
assumptions that persons so isolated are incapable or unworthy of participating in community life. Cf. Allen v. WrightSearch
-
Los Angeles Dept. of Water and Power v. ManhartSearch
-
quoting Sprogis v. UnitedSearch
-
cf. School Bd. of Nassau Cty. v. ArlineSearch
-
five votes for that disposition, I join the Court's judgment and Parts I, II, and III-A of its opinion. Cf. Bragdon v. AbbottSearch
-
Screws v. UnitedSearch
-
disabilities have been subject to historic mistreatment, indifference, and hostility. See, e. g., Cleburne v. CleburneSearch
-
Griggs v. DukeSearch
-
by reason of certain characteristics provided by statute. See, e. g., Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co. v. EEOCSearch
-
U. S. 669 , 683 (1983) (explain- public contracts. See Saint Francis College v. Al-KhazrajiSearch
-
developed in Title VII cases to claims brought under this statute. Patterson v. M cLeanSearch
-
the substantive provisions of the ADEA 'were derived in haec verba from Title VII.''' Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. ThurstonSearch
-
U. S. 111 , 121 (1985) (quoting Lorillard v. PonsSearch
-
et seq., which prohibits discrimination under any federally funded education program or activity. See Franklin v. GwinnettSearch
-
County Public Schools, 503 U. S. 60 , 75 (1992) (relying on Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. VinsonSearch
-
in a manner which but for that person's sex would be different''') (quoting Los Angeles Dept. of Water and Power v. ManhartSearch
-
there existed disparate impact discrimination with respect to a particular job category. Wards Cove Packing Co. v. AtonioSearch
-
of a particular protected group has been favored over another member of that same group. See, e. g., Bush v. CommonwealthSearch
-
that a departure from the traditional understanding of discrimination requires congressional action. Cf. Field v. MansSearch
-
Southeastern Community College v. DavisSearch
-
Id., at 411. Similarly, in Alexander v. ChoateSearch
-
Id., at 304. Likewise, in Traynor v. TurnageSearch
-
of discrimination also informs this Court's constitutional interpretation of the term. See General Motors Corp. v. TracySearch
-
see also Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. PenaSearch
-
See National Organization for Women, Inc. v. ScheidlerSearch
-
in order to invalidate policies we may find unfortunate. Cf. NLRB v. HighlandSearch
-
and not import it into other parts of the law where Congress did not see fit. See, e. g., Bates v. UnitedSearch
-
presumed that Congress acts intentionally and purposely in the disparate inclusion or exclusion''') (quoting Russello v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial