United States v. Hays
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the CourtJustice O’Connor
We held in Shaw v. Reno, 509 U. S. 630 (1993), that a plaintiff may state a claim for relief under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by alleging that a State “adopted a reapportionment scheme so irrational on its face that it can be understood only as an effort to segregate voters into separate voting districts because of their race, *739and that the separation lacks sufficient justification.” Id., at 658. Appellees Ray Hays, Edward Adams, Susan Shaw Singleton, and Gary Stokley claim that the State of Louisiana’s congressional districting plan is such a “racial gerrymander,”…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Allen v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by862 opinions
- Lewis v. CaseySupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Chapman v. Pier 1 Imports (U.S.) Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- Texas Department of Transportation v. City of Sunset ValleyTexas Supreme Court · 2004
- Carroll v. NakataniCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- Bates v. United Parcel Service, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
857 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.