Legal Opinion
Adams v. Clinton
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided November 6, 1998No. Civil Action 98-1665-LFO, 98-2187-LFOPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
OBERDORFER, District Judge.
Two complaints filed by two sets of residents of the District of Columbia allege that Congress has unconstitutionally excluded them from apportionment to a congressional district. Orders entered November 3, 1998, consolidated the cases. Preliminarily, both sets of plaintiffs request that their cases be set before a three-judge district court in the manner contemplated by 28 U.S.C. § 2284(b)(1). That statute requires the convening of such a court “when an action is filed challenging the constitutionality of the apportionment of congressional districts.” 28…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- New York v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Franklin v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- District of Columbia v. CarterSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Washington v. Confederated Tribes of the Colville Indian ReservationSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- United States v. StanleySupreme Court of the United States · 1987
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Adams v. ClintonDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2000
- Igartúa v. ObamaCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2016
- Adams v. ClintonDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2000
- Adams v. ClintonDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1999
- Alabama, State of v. United States Department of CommerceDistrict Court, N.D. Alabama · 2020
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.