Legal Opinion · Dissent

Native American Church of Navajoland, Inc. v. Arizona Corporation Commission

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided February 22, 1972No. 71-533Published

1Dissent

Mr. Justice Douglas, with whom Mr. Justice Stewart and Mr. Justice Rehnquist join,

dissenting.

This is a direct appeal from the order of a three-judge District Court, convened pursuant to 28 U. S. C. § 2281,1 denying appellants’ prayer for injunctive relief. Jurisdiction over the appeal is based upon 28 U. S. C. § 1253.2 If the three-judge court were improperly convened, however, the appeal lies not to this Court, but to the Court of Appeals. Moody v. Flowers, 387 U. S. 97. My anal*902ysis leads me to conclude that a three-judge court was not required, so I would dismiss this appeal.

The controversy…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Phillips v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  2. Moody v. FlowersSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Ex Parte BransfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  4. Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co. v. Oklahoma Packing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
  5. Wilentz v. Sovereign Camp, Woodman of the WorldSupreme Court of the United States · 1939

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API