Knowledge (XXG)

Bray v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic

Source đź“ť

546:. Justice Stevens concludes that in this case, the court has bypassed the plain language of the law in favor of relying on prior precedent, noting that in those cases the statute had been narrowly construed in order to avoid what were perceived to be serious constitutional issues within the statute itself. In Justice Stevens' view, the protesters "... engaged in a nationwide conspiracy; to achieve their goal they repeatedly occupied public streets and trespassed on the premises of private citizens in order to prevent or hinder the constituted authorities from protecting access to abortion clinics by women, a substantial number of whom traveled in interstate commerce to reach the destinations blockaded by petitioners. The case involves no ordinary trespass, nor anything remotely resembling the peaceful picketing of a local retailer. It presents a striking contemporary example of the kind of zealous, politically motivated, lawless conduct that led to the enactment of the Ku Klux Act in 1871 and gave it its name." Justice Scalia counters that "Those are certainly evocative assertions, but as far as the point of law we have been asked to decide is concerned, they are irrelevant...." Scalia notes that to the extent that the protesters violated state and local laws, they are subject to criminal prosecution and civil claims within those jurisdictions. 557:. Justice O'Connor characterizes Griffin's requirement of a "class-based animus" as a shorthand description of the types of actions that the statute is meant to address. However, she agreed with the dissent in Carpenters that "... Congress had in mind a functional definition of the scope of ," and intended to "provide a federal remedy for all classes that seek to exercise their legal rights in unprotected circumstances similar to those of the victims of Klan violence." Accordingly, she would have found that § 1985(3) protected "...nonunion employees injured by mob violence in a "self-professed union town" whose residents resented nonunion activities." It is O'Connor's opinion that if a class is protected by the statute, then it must apply to actions where the motivation is directly related to the unique characteristics of that class. She concludes that the action of blocking access to an abortion clinic is class-based within the meaning of Griffin because it is directly related to the unique abilities of women to become pregnant and to terminate their pregnancies. 31: 580:
contended that it does not exclude individuals because of sexual orientation, but rather “on the basis of a conjunction of conduct and the belief that the conduct is not wrong.” The court held that the university's policy was a reasonable viewpoint-neutral condition on access to the student-organization forum. Bray was cited as an example of a prior decision that had declined to distinguish between status and conduct in the context of unequal treatment, quoting Justice Scalia's example that "A tax on wearing yarmulkes is a tax on Jews."
418:, the court rejected the claim that "women who want abortions" is a class that could satisfy the suggestion in Griffin that discrimination as contemplated under Section 1984(s) could extend beyond the issue of race. The rationale was that if "women who want an abortion" is a class requiring protection, then it would necessarily follow that "people who want to engage in any activity that we seek to prevent" would qualify for similar protection under the statute. 364:
thus deprive that section of all independent effect. Additionally, based on legislative history, the court concluded that "...the language requiring intent to deprive of equal protection, or equal privileges and immunities, means that there must be some racial, or perhaps otherwise class-based, invidiously discriminatory animus behind the conspirators' action."
518:
confirms, in my view, the correctness of the Court's opinion. As all recognize, essential considerations of federalism are at stake here. The federal balance is a fragile one, and a false step in interpreting § 1985(3) risks making a whole catalog of ordinary state crimes a concurrent violation of a single congressional statute passed more than a century ago."
726: 517:
filed a concurring opinion noting that there are three separate dissenting opinions in this case offering differing interpretations of the statute in question. He concludes that "Given the difficulty of the question, this is understandable, but the dissenters' inability to agree on a single rationale
345:
Section 1985's subsection 3 forbids Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights. It establishes that if two or more persons within the United States act for the purpose of directly or indirectly depriving any person or class of persons of equal protections or privileges under the law, the injured party
448:
Justice Scalia frames the final determination of necessary animus as a question "...of whether the proposition that intent is legally irrelevant; that since voluntary abortion is an activity engaged in only by women, to disfavor it is ipso facto to discriminate invidiously against women as a class."
363:
The court found that there is nothing inherent in the wording of Section 1985 that requires state action, noting that an element of companion section 1983 is that the deprivation complained of must have been inflicted under color of state law and that to read any such requirement into 1985 (3) would
332:
Following an expedited trial, the District Court ruled that petitioners had violated section 1985(3) by conspiring to deprive women seeking abortions of their right to interstate travel. The court also ruled for respondents on their pendent state-law claims of trespass and public nuisance. The court
570:
In I v. Pro-Choice Network, Western N.Y, 519 U.S. 357 (1997), the Supreme Court held that an injunction provision that required abortion protesters to move away from abortion clinic patients who asked to be left alone did not violate the First Amendment. The District Court had issued its opinion in
444:
With respect to the first possibility, the court rejects the notion that opposition to voluntary abortion might be considered an "irrational surrogate" for opposition to women. Justice Scalia states that with respect to abortion, "...it cannot be denied that there are common and respectable reasons
336:
The Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court decision in National Organization for Women v. Operation Rescue, 726 F. Supp. 1483 (E.D. Va. 1989) The court found that Bray and others had blocked access to the clinics, therefore depriving women seeking abortions of the right
397:
The construction company's claim was denied. The court held that a conspiracy to infringe First Amendment rights requires proof that the State is involved in the conspiracy or that the aim of the conspiracy is to influence the activity of the State. It also found that this case did not present the
389:
In Carpenters v. Scott, 463 U.S. 825 (1983), A construction company had hired nonunion workers for a project, resulting in the organization of a citizen protest against the company. During the protest at the construction site, company employees were assaulted and beaten, and construction equipment
359:
In Griffin v. Breckenridge, 403 U.S. 88 (1971), the court held that the defendants had violated the petitioners' constitutionally protected right to travel. The case involved black plaintiffs who had been stopped and assaulted and beaten with a deadly weapon while they were riding in a car. It was
591:, 597 U.S. ___ (2022) declined to find a right to abortion under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, quoting Bray's finding that the “...goal of preventing abortion” does not constitute “invidiously discriminatory animus” against women that would be subject to heightened scrutiny. 529:
but disagrees with the Griffin and Carpenters "rights guaranteed against private encroachment" and "class-based animus" requirements. In his opinion, Justice Scalia characterizes Souter's approach as "(1) undertaking a full-dress reconsideration of Griffin and Carpenters, (2) concluding that both
393:
The court reaffirmed the Griffin finding that section 1983 does not require state action when applied to rights that themselves do not require state action. The court addressed the specific question of whether a section 1985(3) claim can be made against individuals with respect to rights that are
453:
Geduldig v. Aiello, 417 U. S. 484 (1974), that found that a state disability insurance system that denied coverage to certain disabilities resulting from pregnancy had not discriminated on the basis of sex, stating that because "... only women can become pregnant, it does not follow that every
579:
Christian Legal Soc. Chapter v. Martinez, 561 U.S. 661 (2010) addressed the question of whether a public university could deny official recognition and the use of school funds and facilities to a student group that refused to open membership and leadership to all students. The CLS chapter had
302:
Alexandria Women's Health Clinic claimed that the protesters violated Section 1985 of The Civil Rights Act of 1871, which prohibits two or more people on a highway or other premises from depriving “any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws, or of equal privileges and
425:
Based on the District Court's finding that the petitioners (Operation Rescue members) described their activity with reference to a physical intervention between abortion practitioners and "the innocent victims", the Court concluded that the "animus" requirement could not be met because the
316:
An action was brought against Operation Rescue, an organization of members who oppose abortion, by clinics that perform abortions and organizations that support abortions and whose members may wish to use an abortion clinic. Operation Rescue organizes anti-abortion demonstrations in which
298:
does not provide a federal cause of action against persons obstructing access to abortion clinics. Alexandria Health Clinic, along with several other abortion clinics, sued to prevent Jayne Bray and other anti-abortion protesters from blocking the entrance to clinics in Washington D.C.
320:
Operation Rescue asserted that its members had not violated section 1985(3), claiming that the statute requires a class-based, discriminatory animus underlying the action. The clinics countered that the actions of the protesters demonstrated a discriminatory animus against women.
457:
Personnel Administrator of Mass. v. Feeney, 442 U. S. 256 (1979), that reached a "similar conclusion" in denying an Equal Protection Clause challenge to a Massachusetts law giving employment preference to military veterans, a class which in Massachusetts was over 98%
421:
The court concluded this would convert the statute into the "general federal tort law" that the animus requirement seeks to avoid, finding that the conspiracy, "... must aim at a deprivation of the equal enjoyment of rights secured by the law to all."
3332: 317:
participants trespass on, and obstruct general access to, the premises of abortion clinics. The clinics sued to enjoin Operation Rescue from conducting demonstrations at abortion clinics in the Washington, D. C., metropolitan area.
530:
those cases were wrongly decided, and (3) limiting the damage of those supposed errors by embracing an interpretation of the statute that concededly gives the same language in two successive clauses completely different meanings."
2576: 2544: 2400: 466:"discriminatory purpose" implies more than "intent as awareness of consequences", it implies that "adverse effects upon an identifiable group" were, at least in part, the purpose of the activity. The decision in 1462: 3479: 3454: 1668: 3459: 1722: 1260: 3356: 2153: 1566: 2248: 1070: 470:
holds that the same principle applies to "the class-based invidiously discriminatory animus" requirement of §1985(3) and the class-based animus can not be determined by the effect.
426:
demonstrations were not motivated by a purpose directed at women as a class. Therefore, the court does not decide whether women in general would qualify as a §1985(3) class under
2312: 1454: 966: 939: 914: 891: 844: 819: 746: 674: 611: 128: 74: 3143: 2208: 1534: 374:
A purpose of depriving, either directly or indirectly, any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws, or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws.
3031: 2691: 2560: 1414: 2328: 2005: 3207: 2496: 2416: 571:
Bray. In light of Bray, the District Court dismissed the respondents' § 1985(3) claim, and the Supreme Court found adequate basis remaining to support the injunction.
360:
claimed that the purpose of the attack was to prevent the plaintiffs from enjoying equal protection under the laws of the United States and the state of Mississippi.
2288: 1582: 1369: 934: 588: 1813: 3364: 2715: 2472: 2320: 2113: 411:
By a 5 to 3 majority, the Supreme Court held that Section 1945(3) does not provide a cause of action for protesters blocking entrance to an abortion clinic.
3167: 3079: 1706: 3474: 1965: 839: 3191: 2723: 1738: 1061: 367:
The case is commonly cited for the four essential elements that it identified as being required to support a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. 1985(3):
3464: 3484: 3469: 3004: 1869: 1470: 1337: 2376: 1550: 1361: 525:
filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part. The opinion supports the court's decision insofar as it relies on
1730: 394:
prohibitions of certain state actions. rights that in themselves require state action must necessarily present a claim of state involvement.
329:
Alexandria Health Clinic argued that the protesters were present to deny women their right to abortion and their right to interstate travel.
2568: 2552: 2456: 2881: 2464: 1574: 3280: 2996: 2921: 2185: 694: 631: 272: 35: 380:
An injury to person or property" or a deprivation of having and exercising any right or privilege of a citizen of the United States.
3340: 1280: 449:
The opinion answers this question in the negative, stating that prior cases do not support this. The opinion cites two prior cases:
1486: 3159: 2029: 2432: 1909: 1754: 1268: 2424: 145:
The first clause of 1985(3) does not provide a federal cause of action against persons obstructing access to abortion clinics.
3135: 2739: 1597: 1381: 1120: 1054: 3223: 3039: 2699: 2137: 1989: 1941: 1682: 1297: 986: 3023: 2193: 1494: 1345: 291: 2873: 2408: 2145: 2536: 3348: 2755: 2747: 2360: 1781: 1714: 3380: 3324: 2488: 2045: 2013: 1438: 1422: 1047: 433:
Based on this record, Justice Scalia concluded that a class-based animus could be established only if either:
295: 109: 1644: 3388: 3255: 2953: 2809: 2070: 1997: 1390: 1305: 2129: 1022: 120: 2619: 2368: 550: 498: 188: 3199: 2849: 2336: 1510: 3308: 3151: 3119: 2707: 2256: 1502: 1204: 1096: 970: 943: 918: 895: 848: 823: 750: 678: 615: 132: 66: 3175: 3087: 2945: 2937: 2833: 2731: 3316: 2480: 3300: 3047: 2913: 2897: 2790: 2595: 2528: 2512: 2304: 2037: 1973: 1853: 1690: 1518: 1478: 1430: 3215: 2825: 2627: 390:
was burned and destroyed, delaying construction and causing the company to default on its contract.
3231: 3183: 3127: 3063: 3055: 2988: 2905: 2865: 2841: 2504: 2448: 2392: 2384: 2021: 1901: 1885: 1762: 1542: 1526: 1220: 1104: 1004: 3292: 3111: 3103: 2929: 2889: 2774: 2643: 2635: 2603: 2520: 2344: 2296: 2272: 2240: 2161: 2105: 2097: 1949: 1845: 1660: 1329: 1244: 1173: 1084: 814: 649: 2857: 1013: 3427: 3419: 3372: 3095: 2969: 2683: 2440: 2280: 2264: 2215: 2201: 2177: 1933: 1917: 1877: 1805: 1746: 1446: 1353: 1289: 1236: 1128: 1039: 554: 543: 539: 502: 493: 489: 180: 160: 2675: 2651: 2232: 1981: 1957: 1821: 1228: 1196: 1144: 995: 346:
or parties may have a cause of action for damages against one or more of the conspirators.
333:
ordered the protesters to pay the clinics’ attorney's fees and costs on the 1985(3) claim.
2089: 1829: 1698: 1252: 1212: 1136: 514: 477: 212: 200: 977: 946: 430:. Justice Scalia simply states that "women seeking abortion" is not a qualifying class. 3239: 3071: 2817: 2782: 2659: 2169: 1925: 1837: 1606: 1112: 921: 898: 851: 826: 753: 618: 522: 483: 192: 176: 681: 3448: 2961: 2352: 2224: 1893: 1861: 1789: 1652: 1558: 1406: 1321: 730: 635: 276: 3247: 2611: 1797: 1152: 445:
for opposing it, other than hatred of, or condescension toward, women as a class."
437:
opposition to abortion can reasonably be presumed to reflect a sex-based intent, or
415: 204: 711: 698: 440:
intent is irrelevant, and a class-based animus can be determined solely by effect.
69: 2497:
Northeastern Fla. Chapter, Associated Gen. Contractors of America v. Jacksonville
2121: 1398: 1313: 1185: 168: 454:
legislative classification concerning pregnancy is a sex-based classification."
2667: 657: 88:
833; 61 U.S.L.W. 4080; 93 Cal. Daily Op. Service 258; 93 Daily Journal DAR 583
85: 3333:
Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board v. College Savings Bank
648: 81: 56:
Jayne Bray, et al., Petitioners v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic, et al.
486:
filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part
1031: 124: 113: 106: 2577:
Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College
2545:
Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1
2401:
Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.
1463:
Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists
729:
This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the
712:"42 U.S. Code § 1985 - Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights" 117: 3407: 3278: 2068: 1669:
Monell v. Department of Social Services of the City of New York
1171: 1082: 1043: 30: 1723:
Inyo County v. Paiute-Shoshone Indians of the Bishop Community
341:
42 U.S.C. 1985(3) - Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights
3357:
Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett
1261:
O'Gorman & Young, Inc. v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co.
294:
case in which the court held that Section 1985(3) of The
3480:
United States Supreme Court cases of the Rehnquist Court
2154:
Sipuel v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma
1567:
Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, Inc.
3455:
Right to abortion under the United States Constitution
2249:
Griffin v. County School Board of Prince Edward County
3460:
Right to privacy under the United States Constitution
2313:
United States v. Montgomery County Board of Education
1455:
City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health
3144:
San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez
2209:
Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County
1535:
Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England
3032:
Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co.
3015: 2980: 2801: 2766: 2587: 2081: 1773: 1593: 1380: 1279: 1184: 651:
National Organization for Women v. Operation Rescue
377:
Action in furtherance of the object of conspiracy,
265: 257: 249: 241: 233: 229:
Scalia, joined by Rehnquist, White, Kennedy, Thomas
225: 220: 149: 139: 103:
National Organization for Women v. Operation Rescue
98: 93: 61: 51: 42: 23: 2692:Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney 2561:Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action 1415:Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth 2329:Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education 2006:Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health 714:. Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School 3208:City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc. 2417:Regents of the University of California v. Bakke 2289:Green v. County School Board of New Kent County 1814:Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. 3365:Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs 2716:Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County 2473:Board of Education of Oklahoma City v. Dowell 2321:Alexander v. Holmes County Board of Education 2114:Cumming v. Richmond County Board of Education 1055: 8: 1583:Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization 1487:Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health 1370:Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization 935:Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization 589:Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization 584:Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization 3168:Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. Murgia 3080:Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections 1707:Will v. Michigan Department of State Police 3404: 3275: 2433:Crawford v. Los Angeles Board of Education 2078: 2065: 1966:Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill 1181: 1168: 1079: 1062: 1048: 1040: 888:Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network, Western N.Y 840:Personnel Administrator of Mass. v. Feeney 566:Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network, Western N.Y 20: 3192:New York City Transit Authority v. Beazer 2724:Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan 1739:Fitzgerald v. Barnstable School Committee 2425:Washington v. Seattle School Dist. No. 1 963:Bray v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic 911:Christian Legal Soc. Chapter v. Martinez 608:Bray v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic 575:Christian Legal Soc. Chapter v. Martinez 398:kind of animus that § 1985(3) requires. 287:Bray v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic 24:Bray v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic 3136:Lehnhausen v. Lake Shore Auto Parts Co. 3005:Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Ward 1870:Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur 1471:Webster v. Reproductive Health Services 1338:Webster v. Reproductive Health Services 600: 473:Four justices filed separate opinions: 2377:Keyes v. School District No. 1, Denver 553:filed a dissenting opinion, joined by 542:filed a dissenting opinion, joined by 501:filed a dissenting opinion, joined by 492:filed a dissenting opinion, joined by 1731:City of Rancho Palos Verdes v. Abrams 414:In the decision delivered by Justice 18:1993 United States Supreme Court case 7: 2457:Wygant v. Jackson Board of Education 1598:Section 1979 of the Revised Statutes 3224:Kadrmas v. Dickinson Public Schools 3040:Quaker City Cab Co. v. Commonwealth 2465:City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. 1575:June Medical Services, LLC v. Russo 1551:Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt 1362:Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt 583: 2997:Arlington County Board v. Richards 2922:Examining Board v. Flores de Otero 2700:Wengler v. Druggists Mut. Ins. Co. 2186:McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents 1071:United States Fourteenth Amendment 36:Supreme Court of the United States 14: 3475:United States Supreme Court cases 3341:Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents 2882:Takahashi v. Fish and Game Comm'n 973:263 (1993) is available from: 3160:Village of Belle Terre v. Boraas 2569:Fisher v. University of Texas II 2030:Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co. 724: 29: 3465:United States abortion case law 2874:Ohio ex rel. Clark v. Deckebach 2553:Fisher v. University of Texas I 1910:Moore v. City of East Cleveland 1755:Los Angeles County v. Humphries 1269:West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish 3485:1993 in United States case law 3470:United States privacy case law 2740:J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B. 1: 2409:Dayton Bd. of Ed. v. Brinkman 1614:McNeese v. Board of Education 1121:United States v. Wong Kim Ark 350:Prior Supreme Court decisions 2138:Hirabayashi v. United States 1990:DeShaney v. Winnebago County 1942:Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co. 1683:Owen v. City of Independence 1298:Pierce v. Society of Sisters 303:immunities under the laws.” 261:O'Connor, joined by Blackmun 3024:United States v. Cruikshank 2194:Brown v. Board of Education 1495:Planned Parenthood v. Casey 1346:Planned Parenthood v. Casey 292:United States Supreme Court 290:, 506 U.S. 263 (1993) is a 253:Stevens, joined by Blackmun 3501: 2146:Korematsu v. United States 1032:Oyez (oral argument audio) 480:filed a concurring opinion 3414: 3403: 3349:United States v. Morrison 3287: 3274: 2756:United States v. Skrmetti 2748:United States v. Virginia 2361:Guey Heung Lee v. Johnson 2077: 2064: 1782:Jacobson v. Massachusetts 1715:Gonzaga University v. Doe 1180: 1167: 1091: 1078: 270: 154: 144: 28: 3381:United States v. Georgia 3325:City of Boerne v. Flores 2489:United States v. Fordice 2046:Williams v. Pennsylvania 2014:Washington v. Glucksberg 296:Civil Rights Act of 1871 47:Decided January 13, 1993 45:Reargued October 6, 1992 3389:Shelby County v. Holder 2954:Cabell v. Chavez-Salido 2810:Patsone v. Pennsylvania 2071:Equal Protection Clause 1998:Michael H. v. Gerald D. 1391:United States v. Vuitch 1306:Griswold v. Connecticut 671:Griffin v. Breckenridge 561:Subsequent Developments 355:Griffin v. Breckenridge 43:Argued October 16, 1991 3256:Armour v. Indianapolis 2620:Moritz v. Commissioner 1676:Procunier v. Navarette 1594:Civil rights liability 1382:Abortion jurisprudence 337:to interstate travel. 127:1990); cert. granted, 3309:Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer 3152:Richardson v. Ramirez 3120:Boddie v. Connecticut 2708:Kirchberg v. Feenstra 2537:Johnson v. California 2257:McLaughlin v. Florida 1645:O'Connor v. Donaldson 1205:Allgeyer v. Louisiana 1097:Slaughter-House Cases 116:1989), affirmed, 914 3301:Katzenbach v. Morgan 3048:Breedlove v. Suttles 2898:Graham v. Richardson 2791:Obergefell v. Hodges 2596:Breedlove v. Suttles 2529:Grutter v. Bollinger 2369:Jefferson v. Hackney 2038:Obergefell v. Hodges 1974:Edwards v. Aguillard 1854:Epperson v. Arkansas 1691:Harlow v. Fitzgerald 1626:Jenkins v. McKeithen 1519:Mazurek v. Armstrong 1479:Hodgson v. Minnesota 1439:Bellotti v. Baird II 1431:Colautti v. Franklin 1186:Economic substantive 407:Opinion of the Court 80:113 S. Ct. 753; 122 3232:Gregory v. Ashcroft 3200:Mills v. Habluetzel 3184:Zablocki v. Redhail 3128:Eisenstadt v. Baird 3064:Oyama v. California 3056:Skinner v. Oklahoma 2989:Shapiro v. Thompson 2906:Sugarman v. Dougall 2850:Porterfield v. Webb 2842:Terrace v. Thompson 2505:Missouri v. Jenkins 2449:Hunter v. Underwood 2393:Milliken v. Bradley 2385:Norwood v. Harrison 2337:McDaniel v. Barresi 2022:Troxel v. Granville 1902:Mathews v. Eldridge 1886:Taylor v. Louisiana 1763:Connick v. Thompson 1543:Gonzales v. Carhart 1527:Stenberg v. Carhart 1511:Lambert v. Wicklund 1423:Bellotti v. Baird I 1221:Lochner v. New York 1105:Minor v. Happersett 1023:Library of Congress 743:Carpenters v. Scott 551:Sandra Day O'Connor 499:Sandra Day O'Connor 385:Carpenters v. Scott 325:Lower Court Rulings 189:Sandra Day O'Connor 3293:Civil Rights Cases 3281:Enforcement Clause 3112:Oregon v. Mitchell 3104:Williams v. Rhodes 2930:Nyquist v. Mauclet 2890:Hernandez v. Texas 2775:Bowers v. Hardwick 2767:Sexual orientation 2644:Stanton v. Stanton 2636:Geduldig v. Aiello 2604:Goesaert v. Cleary 2521:Gratz v. Bollinger 2345:Palmer v. Thompson 2297:Hunter v. Erickson 2273:Loving v. Virginia 2241:Anderson v. Martin 2162:Shelley v. Kraemer 2106:Plessy v. Ferguson 2098:Yick Wo v. Hopkins 1950:Kolender v. Lawson 1846:Loving v. Virginia 1661:Imbler v. Pachtman 1638:Wood v. Strickland 1503:Leavitt v. Jane L. 1330:Bowers v. Hardwick 1245:Buchanan v. Warley 1174:Due Process Clause 1085:Citizenship Clause 815:Geduldig v. Aiello 165:Associate Justices 3442: 3441: 3438: 3437: 3428:Trump v. Anderson 3420:Gold Clause Cases 3399: 3398: 3373:Tennessee v. Lane 3270: 3269: 3266: 3265: 3176:Trimble v. Gordon 3096:Levy v. Louisiana 3088:Rinaldi v. Yeager 2970:Bernal v. Fainter 2946:Ambach v. Norwick 2938:Foley v. Connelie 2834:Crane v. New York 2732:Lehr v. Robertson 2684:Caban v. Mohammed 2441:Palmore v. Sidoti 2281:Lee v. Washington 2265:Reitman v. Mulkey 2216:Gebhart v. Belton 2202:Briggs v. Elliott 2178:Sweatt v. Painter 2060: 2059: 2056: 2055: 1934:Parratt v. Taylor 1918:Duren v. Missouri 1878:Arnett v. Kennedy 1806:Powell v. Alabama 1747:Ashcroft v. Iqbal 1632:Scheuer v. Rhodes 1447:H. L. v. Matheson 1354:Lawrence v. Texas 1290:Meyer v. Nebraska 1237:Coppage v. Kansas 1163: 1162: 1129:Perez v. Brownell 555:Harry A. Blackmun 544:Harry A. Blackmun 540:John Paul Stevens 503:Harry A. Blackmun 494:Harry A. Blackmun 490:John Paul Stevens 312:Facts of the Case 283: 282: 161:William Rehnquist 3492: 3405: 3317:Dellmuth v. Muth 3276: 2676:Parham v. Hughes 2652:Edwards v. Healy 2481:Freeman v. Pitts 2236:(M.D. Ala. 1956) 2233:Browder v. Gayle 2079: 2066: 1982:Turner v. Safley 1958:Hudson v. Palmer 1822:NAACP v. Alabama 1281:Right to privacy 1229:Muller v. Oregon 1197:Mugler v. Kansas 1182: 1169: 1145:Rogers v. Bellei 1080: 1064: 1057: 1050: 1041: 1036: 1030: 1027: 1021: 1018: 1012: 1009: 1003: 1000: 994: 991: 985: 982: 976: 949: 931: 925: 908: 902: 885: 879: 873: 867: 861: 855: 836: 830: 811: 805: 799: 793: 787: 781: 775: 769: 763: 757: 740: 734: 728: 727: 723: 721: 719: 708: 702: 701: 691: 685: 668: 662: 661: 655: 645: 639: 638: 628: 622: 605: 279: 150:Court membership 135:1119 (1991). 33: 32: 21: 3500: 3499: 3495: 3494: 3493: 3491: 3490: 3489: 3445: 3444: 3443: 3434: 3410: 3395: 3283: 3262: 3011: 2976: 2914:In re Griffiths 2858:Webb v. O'Brien 2797: 2762: 2583: 2513:Texas v. Lesage 2305:Hadnott v. Amos 2090:Pace v. Alabama 2073: 2052: 1830:Hoyt v. Florida 1769: 1699:Felder v. Casey 1595: 1589: 1376: 1275: 1253:Adams v. Tanner 1213:Holden v. Hardy 1187: 1176: 1159: 1137:Afroyim v. Rusk 1087: 1074: 1068: 1034: 1028: 1025: 1019: 1016: 1010: 1007: 1001: 998: 992: 989: 983: 980: 974: 958: 953: 952: 932: 928: 909: 905: 886: 882: 874: 870: 862: 858: 837: 833: 812: 808: 800: 796: 788: 784: 776: 772: 764: 760: 741: 737: 725: 717: 715: 710: 709: 705: 693: 692: 688: 669: 665: 647: 646: 642: 630: 629: 625: 606: 602: 597: 586: 577: 568: 563: 536: 515:Anthony Kennedy 511: 478:Anthony Kennedy 409: 404: 387: 357: 352: 343: 327: 314: 309: 271: 213:Clarence Thomas 203: 201:Anthony Kennedy 191: 181:John P. Stevens 179: 89: 46: 44: 38: 19: 12: 11: 5: 3498: 3496: 3488: 3487: 3482: 3477: 3472: 3467: 3462: 3457: 3447: 3446: 3440: 3439: 3436: 3435: 3433: 3432: 3424: 3415: 3412: 3411: 3408: 3401: 3400: 3397: 3396: 3394: 3393: 3385: 3377: 3369: 3361: 3353: 3345: 3337: 3329: 3321: 3313: 3305: 3297: 3288: 3285: 3284: 3279: 3272: 3271: 3268: 3267: 3264: 3263: 3261: 3260: 3252: 3244: 3240:Vacco v. Quill 3236: 3228: 3220: 3216:Clark v. Jeter 3212: 3204: 3196: 3188: 3180: 3172: 3164: 3156: 3148: 3140: 3132: 3124: 3116: 3108: 3100: 3092: 3084: 3076: 3072:Oyler v. Boles 3068: 3060: 3052: 3044: 3036: 3028: 3019: 3017: 3013: 3012: 3010: 3009: 3001: 2993: 2984: 2982: 2978: 2977: 2975: 2974: 2966: 2958: 2950: 2942: 2934: 2926: 2918: 2910: 2902: 2894: 2886: 2878: 2870: 2862: 2854: 2846: 2838: 2830: 2826:Heim v. McCall 2822: 2818:Truax v. Raich 2814: 2805: 2803: 2799: 2798: 2796: 2795: 2787: 2783:Romer v. Evans 2779: 2770: 2768: 2764: 2763: 2761: 2760: 2752: 2744: 2736: 2728: 2720: 2712: 2704: 2696: 2688: 2680: 2672: 2664: 2660:Craig v. Boren 2656: 2648: 2640: 2632: 2628:Kahn v. Shevin 2624: 2616: 2608: 2600: 2591: 2589: 2585: 2584: 2582: 2581: 2573: 2565: 2557: 2549: 2541: 2533: 2525: 2517: 2509: 2501: 2493: 2485: 2477: 2469: 2461: 2453: 2445: 2437: 2429: 2421: 2413: 2405: 2397: 2389: 2381: 2373: 2365: 2357: 2349: 2341: 2333: 2325: 2317: 2309: 2301: 2293: 2285: 2277: 2269: 2261: 2253: 2245: 2237: 2229: 2221: 2220: 2219: 2212: 2205: 2190: 2182: 2174: 2170:Perez v. Sharp 2166: 2158: 2150: 2142: 2134: 2130:Smith v. Texas 2126: 2118: 2110: 2102: 2094: 2085: 2083: 2075: 2074: 2069: 2062: 2061: 2058: 2057: 2054: 2053: 2051: 2050: 2042: 2034: 2026: 2018: 2010: 2002: 1994: 1986: 1978: 1970: 1962: 1954: 1946: 1938: 1930: 1926:Parham v. J.R. 1922: 1914: 1906: 1898: 1890: 1882: 1874: 1866: 1858: 1850: 1842: 1838:Oyler v. Boles 1834: 1826: 1818: 1810: 1802: 1794: 1786: 1777: 1775: 1771: 1770: 1768: 1767: 1759: 1751: 1743: 1735: 1727: 1719: 1711: 1703: 1695: 1687: 1679: 1673: 1665: 1657: 1649: 1641: 1635: 1629: 1623: 1620:Pierson v. Ray 1617: 1611: 1607:Monroe v. Pape 1602: 1600: 1591: 1590: 1588: 1587: 1579: 1571: 1563: 1555: 1547: 1539: 1531: 1523: 1515: 1507: 1499: 1491: 1483: 1475: 1467: 1459: 1451: 1443: 1435: 1427: 1419: 1411: 1403: 1395: 1386: 1384: 1378: 1377: 1375: 1374: 1366: 1358: 1350: 1342: 1334: 1326: 1318: 1310: 1302: 1294: 1285: 1283: 1277: 1276: 1274: 1273: 1265: 1257: 1249: 1241: 1233: 1225: 1217: 1209: 1201: 1192: 1190: 1178: 1177: 1172: 1165: 1164: 1161: 1160: 1158: 1157: 1149: 1141: 1133: 1125: 1117: 1113:Elk v. Wilkins 1109: 1101: 1092: 1089: 1088: 1083: 1076: 1075: 1069: 1067: 1066: 1059: 1052: 1044: 1038: 1037: 1005:Google Scholar 957: 956:External links 954: 951: 950: 926: 903: 880: 868: 856: 831: 806: 794: 782: 770: 758: 735: 703: 686: 663: 640: 636:§ 1985(3) 623: 599: 598: 596: 593: 585: 582: 576: 573: 567: 564: 562: 559: 535: 532: 527:stare decisis, 523:David H Souter 510: 507: 506: 505: 496: 487: 484:David H Souter 481: 460: 459: 455: 442: 441: 438: 408: 405: 403: 400: 386: 383: 382: 381: 378: 375: 372: 356: 353: 351: 348: 342: 339: 326: 323: 313: 310: 308: 305: 281: 280: 277:§ 1985(3) 268: 267: 263: 262: 259: 255: 254: 251: 247: 246: 243: 242:Concur/dissent 239: 238: 235: 231: 230: 227: 223: 222: 218: 217: 216: 215: 193:Antonin Scalia 177:Harry Blackmun 166: 163: 158: 152: 151: 147: 146: 142: 141: 137: 136: 100: 96: 95: 91: 90: 79: 63: 59: 58: 53: 52:Full case name 49: 48: 40: 39: 34: 26: 25: 17: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3497: 3486: 3483: 3481: 3478: 3476: 3473: 3471: 3468: 3466: 3463: 3461: 3458: 3456: 3453: 3452: 3450: 3430: 3429: 3425: 3422: 3421: 3417: 3416: 3413: 3406: 3402: 3391: 3390: 3386: 3383: 3382: 3378: 3375: 3374: 3370: 3367: 3366: 3362: 3359: 3358: 3354: 3351: 3350: 3346: 3343: 3342: 3338: 3335: 3334: 3330: 3327: 3326: 3322: 3319: 3318: 3314: 3311: 3310: 3306: 3303: 3302: 3298: 3295: 3294: 3290: 3289: 3286: 3282: 3277: 3273: 3258: 3257: 3253: 3250: 3249: 3245: 3242: 3241: 3237: 3234: 3233: 3229: 3226: 3225: 3221: 3218: 3217: 3213: 3210: 3209: 3205: 3202: 3201: 3197: 3194: 3193: 3189: 3186: 3185: 3181: 3178: 3177: 3173: 3170: 3169: 3165: 3162: 3161: 3157: 3154: 3153: 3149: 3146: 3145: 3141: 3138: 3137: 3133: 3130: 3129: 3125: 3122: 3121: 3117: 3114: 3113: 3109: 3106: 3105: 3101: 3098: 3097: 3093: 3090: 3089: 3085: 3082: 3081: 3077: 3074: 3073: 3069: 3066: 3065: 3061: 3058: 3057: 3053: 3050: 3049: 3045: 3042: 3041: 3037: 3034: 3033: 3029: 3026: 3025: 3021: 3020: 3018: 3014: 3007: 3006: 3002: 2999: 2998: 2994: 2991: 2990: 2986: 2985: 2983: 2979: 2972: 2971: 2967: 2964: 2963: 2962:Plyler v. Doe 2959: 2956: 2955: 2951: 2948: 2947: 2943: 2940: 2939: 2935: 2932: 2931: 2927: 2924: 2923: 2919: 2916: 2915: 2911: 2908: 2907: 2903: 2900: 2899: 2895: 2892: 2891: 2887: 2884: 2883: 2879: 2876: 2875: 2871: 2868: 2867: 2866:Frick v. Webb 2863: 2860: 2859: 2855: 2852: 2851: 2847: 2844: 2843: 2839: 2836: 2835: 2831: 2828: 2827: 2823: 2820: 2819: 2815: 2812: 2811: 2807: 2806: 2804: 2800: 2793: 2792: 2788: 2785: 2784: 2780: 2777: 2776: 2772: 2771: 2769: 2765: 2758: 2757: 2753: 2750: 2749: 2745: 2742: 2741: 2737: 2734: 2733: 2729: 2726: 2725: 2721: 2718: 2717: 2713: 2710: 2709: 2705: 2702: 2701: 2697: 2694: 2693: 2689: 2686: 2685: 2681: 2678: 2677: 2673: 2670: 2669: 2665: 2662: 2661: 2657: 2654: 2653: 2649: 2646: 2645: 2641: 2638: 2637: 2633: 2630: 2629: 2625: 2622: 2621: 2617: 2614: 2613: 2609: 2606: 2605: 2601: 2598: 2597: 2593: 2592: 2590: 2586: 2579: 2578: 2574: 2571: 2570: 2566: 2563: 2562: 2558: 2555: 2554: 2550: 2547: 2546: 2542: 2539: 2538: 2534: 2531: 2530: 2526: 2523: 2522: 2518: 2515: 2514: 2510: 2507: 2506: 2502: 2499: 2498: 2494: 2491: 2490: 2486: 2483: 2482: 2478: 2475: 2474: 2470: 2467: 2466: 2462: 2459: 2458: 2454: 2451: 2450: 2446: 2443: 2442: 2438: 2435: 2434: 2430: 2427: 2426: 2422: 2419: 2418: 2414: 2411: 2410: 2406: 2403: 2402: 2398: 2395: 2394: 2390: 2387: 2386: 2382: 2379: 2378: 2374: 2371: 2370: 2366: 2363: 2362: 2358: 2355: 2354: 2353:Coit v. Green 2350: 2347: 2346: 2342: 2339: 2338: 2334: 2331: 2330: 2326: 2323: 2322: 2318: 2315: 2314: 2310: 2307: 2306: 2302: 2299: 2298: 2294: 2291: 2290: 2286: 2283: 2282: 2278: 2275: 2274: 2270: 2267: 2266: 2262: 2259: 2258: 2254: 2251: 2250: 2246: 2243: 2242: 2238: 2235: 2234: 2230: 2227: 2226: 2225:Lucy v. Adams 2222: 2218: 2217: 2213: 2211: 2210: 2206: 2204: 2203: 2199: 2198: 2196: 2195: 2191: 2188: 2187: 2183: 2180: 2179: 2175: 2172: 2171: 2167: 2164: 2163: 2159: 2156: 2155: 2151: 2148: 2147: 2143: 2140: 2139: 2135: 2132: 2131: 2127: 2124: 2123: 2119: 2116: 2115: 2111: 2108: 2107: 2103: 2100: 2099: 2095: 2092: 2091: 2087: 2086: 2084: 2080: 2076: 2072: 2067: 2063: 2048: 2047: 2043: 2040: 2039: 2035: 2032: 2031: 2027: 2024: 2023: 2019: 2016: 2015: 2011: 2008: 2007: 2003: 2000: 1999: 1995: 1992: 1991: 1987: 1984: 1983: 1979: 1976: 1975: 1971: 1968: 1967: 1963: 1960: 1959: 1955: 1952: 1951: 1947: 1944: 1943: 1939: 1936: 1935: 1931: 1928: 1927: 1923: 1920: 1919: 1915: 1912: 1911: 1907: 1904: 1903: 1899: 1896: 1895: 1894:Goss v. Lopez 1891: 1888: 1887: 1883: 1880: 1879: 1875: 1872: 1871: 1867: 1864: 1863: 1862:In re Winship 1859: 1856: 1855: 1851: 1848: 1847: 1843: 1840: 1839: 1835: 1832: 1831: 1827: 1824: 1823: 1819: 1816: 1815: 1811: 1808: 1807: 1803: 1800: 1799: 1795: 1792: 1791: 1790:Zucht v. King 1787: 1784: 1783: 1779: 1778: 1776: 1772: 1765: 1764: 1760: 1757: 1756: 1752: 1749: 1748: 1744: 1741: 1740: 1736: 1733: 1732: 1728: 1725: 1724: 1720: 1717: 1716: 1712: 1709: 1708: 1704: 1701: 1700: 1696: 1693: 1692: 1688: 1685: 1684: 1680: 1677: 1674: 1671: 1670: 1666: 1663: 1662: 1658: 1655: 1654: 1653:Paul v. Davis 1650: 1647: 1646: 1642: 1639: 1636: 1633: 1630: 1627: 1624: 1621: 1618: 1615: 1612: 1609: 1608: 1604: 1603: 1601: 1599: 1592: 1585: 1584: 1580: 1577: 1576: 1572: 1569: 1568: 1564: 1561: 1560: 1559:Azar v. Garza 1556: 1553: 1552: 1548: 1545: 1544: 1540: 1537: 1536: 1532: 1529: 1528: 1524: 1521: 1520: 1516: 1513: 1512: 1508: 1505: 1504: 1500: 1497: 1496: 1492: 1489: 1488: 1484: 1481: 1480: 1476: 1473: 1472: 1468: 1465: 1464: 1460: 1457: 1456: 1452: 1449: 1448: 1444: 1441: 1440: 1436: 1433: 1432: 1428: 1425: 1424: 1420: 1417: 1416: 1412: 1409: 1408: 1407:Doe v. Bolton 1404: 1401: 1400: 1396: 1393: 1392: 1388: 1387: 1385: 1383: 1379: 1372: 1371: 1367: 1364: 1363: 1359: 1356: 1355: 1351: 1348: 1347: 1343: 1340: 1339: 1335: 1332: 1331: 1327: 1324: 1323: 1322:Doe v. Bolton 1319: 1316: 1315: 1311: 1308: 1307: 1303: 1300: 1299: 1295: 1292: 1291: 1287: 1286: 1284: 1282: 1278: 1271: 1270: 1266: 1263: 1262: 1258: 1255: 1254: 1250: 1247: 1246: 1242: 1239: 1238: 1234: 1231: 1230: 1226: 1223: 1222: 1218: 1215: 1214: 1210: 1207: 1206: 1202: 1199: 1198: 1194: 1193: 1191: 1189: 1183: 1179: 1175: 1170: 1166: 1155: 1154: 1150: 1147: 1146: 1142: 1139: 1138: 1134: 1131: 1130: 1126: 1123: 1122: 1118: 1115: 1114: 1110: 1107: 1106: 1102: 1099: 1098: 1094: 1093: 1090: 1086: 1081: 1077: 1072: 1065: 1060: 1058: 1053: 1051: 1046: 1045: 1042: 1033: 1024: 1015: 1006: 997: 988: 987:CourtListener 979: 972: 968: 964: 960: 959: 955: 948: 945: 941: 937: 936: 930: 927: 923: 920: 916: 912: 907: 904: 900: 897: 893: 889: 884: 881: 877: 872: 869: 865: 860: 857: 853: 850: 846: 842: 841: 835: 832: 828: 825: 821: 817: 816: 810: 807: 803: 798: 795: 791: 786: 783: 779: 774: 771: 767: 762: 759: 755: 752: 748: 744: 739: 736: 732: 731:public domain 713: 707: 704: 700: 696: 690: 687: 683: 680: 676: 672: 667: 664: 659: 654: 652: 644: 641: 637: 633: 627: 624: 620: 617: 613: 609: 604: 601: 594: 592: 590: 581: 574: 572: 565: 560: 558: 556: 552: 547: 545: 541: 533: 531: 528: 524: 519: 516: 508: 504: 500: 497: 495: 491: 488: 485: 482: 479: 476: 475: 474: 471: 469: 465: 456: 452: 451: 450: 446: 439: 436: 435: 434: 431: 429: 423: 419: 417: 412: 406: 402:Supreme Court 401: 399: 395: 391: 384: 379: 376: 373: 370: 369: 368: 365: 361: 354: 349: 347: 340: 338: 334: 330: 324: 322: 318: 311: 306: 304: 300: 297: 293: 289: 288: 278: 274: 269: 264: 260: 256: 252: 248: 244: 240: 236: 232: 228: 224: 221:Case opinions 219: 214: 210: 206: 202: 198: 194: 190: 186: 182: 178: 174: 170: 167: 164: 162: 159: 157:Chief Justice 156: 155: 153: 148: 143: 138: 134: 130: 126: 122: 119: 115: 111: 108: 104: 101: 97: 92: 87: 83: 77: 76: 71: 68: 64: 60: 57: 54: 50: 41: 37: 27: 22: 16: 3426: 3418: 3387: 3379: 3371: 3363: 3355: 3347: 3339: 3331: 3323: 3315: 3307: 3299: 3291: 3254: 3248:Bush v. Gore 3246: 3238: 3230: 3222: 3214: 3206: 3198: 3190: 3182: 3174: 3166: 3158: 3150: 3142: 3134: 3126: 3118: 3110: 3102: 3094: 3086: 3078: 3070: 3062: 3054: 3046: 3038: 3030: 3022: 3003: 2995: 2987: 2968: 2960: 2952: 2944: 2936: 2928: 2920: 2912: 2904: 2896: 2888: 2880: 2872: 2864: 2856: 2848: 2840: 2832: 2824: 2816: 2808: 2789: 2781: 2773: 2754: 2746: 2738: 2730: 2722: 2714: 2706: 2698: 2690: 2682: 2674: 2666: 2658: 2650: 2642: 2634: 2626: 2618: 2612:Reed v. Reed 2610: 2602: 2594: 2575: 2567: 2559: 2551: 2543: 2535: 2527: 2519: 2511: 2503: 2495: 2487: 2479: 2471: 2463: 2455: 2447: 2439: 2431: 2423: 2415: 2407: 2399: 2391: 2383: 2375: 2367: 2359: 2351: 2343: 2335: 2327: 2319: 2311: 2303: 2295: 2287: 2279: 2271: 2263: 2255: 2247: 2239: 2231: 2223: 2214: 2207: 2200: 2192: 2184: 2176: 2168: 2160: 2152: 2144: 2136: 2128: 2120: 2112: 2104: 2096: 2088: 2044: 2036: 2028: 2020: 2012: 2004: 1996: 1988: 1980: 1972: 1964: 1956: 1948: 1940: 1932: 1924: 1916: 1908: 1900: 1892: 1884: 1876: 1868: 1860: 1852: 1844: 1836: 1828: 1820: 1812: 1804: 1798:Buck v. Bell 1796: 1788: 1780: 1761: 1753: 1745: 1737: 1729: 1721: 1713: 1705: 1697: 1689: 1681: 1675: 1667: 1659: 1651: 1643: 1637: 1631: 1625: 1619: 1613: 1605: 1581: 1573: 1565: 1557: 1549: 1541: 1533: 1525: 1517: 1509: 1501: 1493: 1485: 1477: 1469: 1461: 1453: 1445: 1437: 1429: 1421: 1413: 1405: 1397: 1389: 1368: 1360: 1352: 1344: 1336: 1328: 1320: 1312: 1304: 1296: 1288: 1267: 1259: 1251: 1243: 1235: 1227: 1219: 1211: 1203: 1195: 1153:Saenz v. Roe 1151: 1143: 1135: 1127: 1119: 1111: 1103: 1095: 962: 933: 929: 910: 906: 887: 883: 875: 871: 863: 859: 838: 834: 813: 809: 801: 797: 789: 785: 777: 773: 765: 761: 742: 738: 718:February 15, 716:. Retrieved 706: 689: 670: 666: 656:– via 650: 643: 626: 607: 603: 587: 578: 569: 548: 537: 526: 520: 512: 509:Concurrences 472: 467: 463: 461: 447: 443: 432: 427: 424: 420: 416:Anton Scalia 413: 410: 396: 392: 388: 366: 362: 358: 344: 335: 331: 328: 319: 315: 301: 286: 285: 284: 266:Laws applied 208: 205:David Souter 196: 184: 172: 102: 94:Case history 73: 55: 15: 2173:(Cal. 1948) 2122:Lum v. Rice 1399:Roe v. Wade 1314:Roe v. Wade 1188:due process 924: (2010) 901: (1997) 854: (1979) 829: (1974) 756: (1983) 699:§ 1983 684: (1971) 621: (1993) 234:Concurrence 169:Byron White 3449:Categories 2668:Orr v. Orr 658:Wikisource 595:References 371:Conspiracy 307:Background 86:U.S. LEXIS 2981:Residency 780:at 269-70 695:42 U.S.C. 632:42 U.S.C. 273:42 U.S.C. 84:34; 1993 82:L. Ed. 2d 62:Citations 2802:Alienage 1073:case law 961:Text of 549:Justice 538:Justice 534:Dissents 521:Justice 513:Justice 226:Majority 125:4th Cir. 114:E.D. Va. 107:F. Supp. 2197:(1954) 996:Findlaw 978:Cornell 428:Griffin 258:Dissent 250:Dissent 237:Kennedy 140:Holding 3431:(2024) 3423:(1935) 3392:(2013) 3384:(2006) 3376:(2004) 3368:(2003) 3360:(2001) 3352:(2000) 3344:(2000) 3336:(1999) 3328:(1997) 3320:(1989) 3312:(1976) 3304:(1966) 3296:(1883) 3259:(2012) 3251:(2000) 3243:(1997) 3235:(1991) 3227:(1988) 3219:(1988) 3211:(1985) 3203:(1982) 3195:(1979) 3187:(1978) 3179:(1977) 3171:(1976) 3163:(1974) 3155:(1974) 3147:(1973) 3139:(1973) 3131:(1972) 3123:(1971) 3115:(1970) 3107:(1968) 3099:(1968) 3091:(1966) 3083:(1966) 3075:(1962) 3067:(1948) 3059:(1942) 3051:(1937) 3043:(1928) 3035:(1886) 3027:(1876) 3008:(1985) 3000:(1977) 2992:(1969) 2973:(1984) 2965:(1982) 2957:(1982) 2949:(1979) 2941:(1978) 2933:(1977) 2925:(1976) 2917:(1973) 2909:(1973) 2901:(1971) 2893:(1954) 2885:(1948) 2877:(1927) 2869:(1923) 2861:(1923) 2853:(1923) 2845:(1923) 2837:(1915) 2829:(1915) 2821:(1915) 2813:(1914) 2794:(2015) 2786:(1996) 2778:(1986) 2759:(2024) 2751:(1996) 2743:(1994) 2735:(1983) 2727:(1982) 2719:(1981) 2711:(1981) 2703:(1980) 2695:(1979) 2687:(1979) 2679:(1979) 2671:(1979) 2663:(1976) 2655:(1975) 2647:(1975) 2639:(1974) 2631:(1974) 2623:(1972) 2615:(1971) 2607:(1948) 2599:(1937) 2580:(2023) 2572:(2016) 2564:(2014) 2556:(2013) 2548:(2007) 2540:(2005) 2532:(2003) 2524:(2003) 2516:(1999) 2508:(1995) 2500:(1993) 2492:(1992) 2484:(1992) 2476:(1991) 2468:(1989) 2460:(1986) 2452:(1985) 2444:(1984) 2436:(1982) 2428:(1982) 2420:(1978) 2412:(1977) 2404:(1977) 2396:(1974) 2388:(1973) 2380:(1973) 2372:(1972) 2364:(1971) 2356:(1971) 2348:(1971) 2340:(1971) 2332:(1971) 2324:(1969) 2316:(1969) 2308:(1969) 2300:(1969) 2292:(1968) 2284:(1968) 2276:(1967) 2268:(1967) 2260:(1964) 2252:(1964) 2244:(1964) 2228:(1955) 2189:(1950) 2181:(1950) 2165:(1948) 2157:(1948) 2149:(1944) 2141:(1943) 2133:(1940) 2125:(1927) 2117:(1899) 2109:(1896) 2101:(1886) 2093:(1883) 2049:(2016) 2041:(2015) 2033:(2009) 2025:(2000) 2017:(1997) 2009:(1990) 2001:(1989) 1993:(1989) 1985:(1987) 1977:(1987) 1969:(1985) 1961:(1984) 1953:(1983) 1945:(1982) 1937:(1981) 1929:(1979) 1921:(1979) 1913:(1977) 1905:(1976) 1897:(1975) 1889:(1975) 1881:(1974) 1873:(1974) 1865:(1971) 1857:(1968) 1849:(1967) 1841:(1962) 1833:(1961) 1825:(1958) 1817:(1950) 1809:(1932) 1801:(1927) 1793:(1922) 1785:(1905) 1766:(2011) 1758:(2010) 1750:(2009) 1742:(2009) 1734:(2005) 1726:(2003) 1718:(2002) 1710:(1989) 1702:(1988) 1694:(1982) 1686:(1980) 1678:(1978) 1672:(1978) 1664:(1976) 1656:(1976) 1648:(1975) 1640:(1975) 1634:(1974) 1628:(1969) 1622:(1967) 1616:(1963) 1610:(1961) 1596:under 1586:(2022) 1578:(2020) 1570:(2019) 1562:(2018) 1554:(2016) 1546:(2007) 1538:(2006) 1530:(2000) 1522:(1997) 1514:(1997) 1506:(1996) 1498:(1992) 1490:(1990) 1482:(1990) 1474:(1989) 1466:(1986) 1458:(1983) 1450:(1981) 1442:(1979) 1434:(1979) 1426:(1976) 1418:(1976) 1410:(1973) 1402:(1973) 1394:(1971) 1373:(2022) 1365:(2016) 1357:(2003) 1349:(1992) 1341:(1989) 1333:(1986) 1325:(1973) 1317:(1973) 1309:(1965) 1301:(1925) 1293:(1923) 1272:(1937) 1264:(1931) 1256:(1917) 1248:(1917) 1240:(1915) 1232:(1908) 1224:(1905) 1216:(1898) 1208:(1897) 1200:(1887) 1156:(1999) 1148:(1971) 1140:(1967) 1132:(1958) 1124:(1898) 1116:(1884) 1108:(1875) 1100:(1873) 1035:  1029:  1026:  1020:  1017:  1014:Justia 1011:  1008:  1002:  999:  993:  990:  984:  981:  975:  938:, 913:, 890:, 878:at 272 866:at 271 843:, 818:, 804:at 270 792:at 270 768:at 269 745:, 697:  673:, 653:  634:  610:, 464:Feeney 462:Under 458:male." 275:  245:Souter 211: 209:· 207:  199: 197:· 195:  187: 185:· 183:  175: 173:· 171:  105:, 726 3409:Other 3016:Other 1774:Other 969: 942: 917: 894: 847: 822: 749: 677: 614: 131: 99:Prior 2082:Race 971:U.S. 947:2022 944:U.S. 919:U.S. 896:U.S. 876:Bray 864:Bray 849:U.S. 824:U.S. 802:Bray 790:Bray 778:Bray 766:Bray 751:U.S. 720:2023 679:U.S. 616:U.S. 468:Bray 133:U.S. 118:F.2d 110:1483 75:more 67:U.S. 65:506 2588:Sex 967:506 940:597 922:661 915:561 899:357 892:519 852:256 845:442 827:484 820:417 754:825 747:463 675:403 619:263 612:506 129:498 121:582 70:263 3451:: 965:, 682:88 1063:e 1056:t 1049:v 733:. 722:. 660:. 123:( 112:( 78:) 72:(

Index

Supreme Court of the United States
U.S.
263
more
L. Ed. 2d
U.S. LEXIS
F. Supp.
1483
E.D. Va.
F.2d
582
4th Cir.
498
U.S.
William Rehnquist
Byron White
Harry Blackmun
John P. Stevens
Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia
Anthony Kennedy
David Souter
Clarence Thomas
42 U.S.C.
§ 1985(3)
United States Supreme Court
Civil Rights Act of 1871
Anton Scalia
Anthony Kennedy
David H Souter

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

↑