Citation network
Brown Vs. Plata
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 16, 2011
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
-
Brown, et al. v. PlataSearch
-
Et Al. Syllabus October Term, 2010 Brown V. PlataSearch
-
population was almost double that. The resulting conditions are the subject of two federal class actions. In Coleman v. BrownSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
s prisons was deteriorating due to increased overcrowding. In Plata v. BrownSearch
-
adequate medical care, the courts have a responsibility to remedy the resulting Eighth Amendment violation. See Hutto v. FinneySearch
-
to determine the authority of a court below, including whether a three-judge court was properly constituted. Gonzalez v. AutomaticSearch
-
Board of Trustees of State Univ. of N. Y. v. FoxSearch
-
which Thomas, J., joined. Alito, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Roberts, C. J., joined. Brown v. PlataSearch
-
Opinion of the Court Brown V. PlataSearch
-
Court of the United States No. 09-1233 Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Governor of Cal- Ifornia, Et Al., Appellants V. MarcianoSearch
-
Federal District Courts. The first involves the class of prisoners with serious mental disorders. That case is Coleman v. BrownSearch
-
The second involves prisoners with serious medical conditions. That case is Plata v. BrownSearch
-
unnecessary pain. B These conditions are the subject of two federal cases. The first to commence, Coleman v. BrownSearch
-
in California prisons. Coleman v. WilsonSearch
-
Id., at 489. C The second action, Plata v. BrownSearch
-
and the Court postponed consideration of the question of jurisdiction to the hearing on the merits. Schwarzenegger v. PlataSearch
-
U. S. 304 , 311 (2002) (quoting Trop v. DullesSearch
-
this obligation, the courts have a responsibility to remedy the resulting Eighth Amendment violation. See Hutto v. FinneySearch
-
administrators faced with the difficult and dangerous task of housing large numbers of convicted criminals. See Bell v. WolfishSearch
-
C. Wright, A. Miller, E. Cooper, & v. AmarSearch
-
s legal determinations is de novo , but factual findings are reviewed for clear error. See Anderson v. BessemerSearch
-
Id., at 573 (quoting United States v. UnitedSearch
-
including whether the three-judge court was properly constituted. Gonzalez v. AutomaticSearch
-
Employees Credit Union , 419 U. S. 90 , 95, n. 12 (1974) (quoting Bailey v. PattersonSearch
-
see also Gully v. InterstateSearch
-
Inmates of Occoquan v. BarrySearch
-
s primary cause determination is deferential. Salve Regina College v. RussellSearch
-
render population limits unavailable in practice would raise serious constitutional concerns. See, e.g., Bowen v. MichiganSearch
-
orders that unnecessarily reach out to improve prison conditions other than those that violate the Constitution. Lewis v. CaseySearch
-
out to control the treatment of persons or institutions beyond the scope of the violation. See Dayton Bd. of Ed. v. BrinkmanSearch
-
Hutto , 437 U. S., at 687, n. 9 (quoting Milliken v. BradleySearch
-
U. S. 267 , 281 (1977), in turn quoting Swann v. Charlotte-MecklenburgSearch
-
Rhodes v. ChapmanSearch
-
New York State Assn . for Retarded Children, Inc. v. CareySearch
-
would violate the Constitution under Estelle v. GambleSearch
-
in the prisons to fall below the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society. Farmer v. BrennanSearch
-
Harris v. ReevesSearch
-
the State to use any particular approach to reduce its prison population or allocate its resources. Brown v. PlataSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial