Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

378 U.S. 565

Hill v. Davis

Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1964-06-22

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently December 1971

1 district · 7 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“The case is remanded for further proceedings, with respect to relief, consistent with the views stated in our opinions in Reynolds v. Sims and in the other cases relating to state legislative apportionment decided along with Reynolds, should that become necessary.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 238 F. Supp. 462 - Davis v. Cameron

Relies on Reynolds v. Sims

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1964-06-22

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1 The judgment below is affirmed. Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533. The case is remanded for further proceedings, with respect to relief, consistent with the views stated in our opinions in Reynolds v. Sims and in the other cases relating to state legislative apportionment decided along with Reynolds, should that become necessary. Since this appeal presents no question as to the correctness of the District Court’s later decision upholding the validity of the temporary reapportionment plan enacted by the Iowa General Assembly in February 1964, we do not consider or pass upon this matter.

Mr. Justice Clark would affirm on the grounds stated in his opinion in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533, 587. Mr. Justice Stewart would affirm the judgment insofar as it holds that Iowa’s system of legislative apportionment violates the Equal Protection Clause. Mr. Justice Harlan dissents for the reasons stated in his dissenting opinion in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533, 589.
/378/us/565 · .json · Public domain