Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 381 F. Supp. 822 - Smith v. Dunn

381 F. Supp. 822 - Smith v. Dunn’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
February 1979
most recently cited

1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 28 U.S.C. § 2201 · 28 U.S.C. § 2281 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Reynolds v. Sims · Shapiro v. Thompson · Yick Wo v. Hopkins · Dunn v. Blumstein · Reed v. Reed

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In deciding the constitutionality of this distinction it is, of course, accepted that under the Fourteenth Amendment States need not treat all classes of persons identically. Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S. 71 , 92 S.Ct. 251 , 30 L.Ed.2d 225 (1971); Carrington v. Rash, supra [ 380 U.S. 89 , 85 S.Ct. 775 , 13 L.Ed.2d 675 ]; Manson v. Edwards, 482 F.2d 1076 (6th Cir. 1973). The validity of state classifications under the equal protection clause is assessed with reference to one of two established standards of review. The traditional standard, or “rational basis test,” “requires that a state classification be upheld unless there is no rational relationship between the classification imposed by the state and the state’s reasonable goals.” Robinson v. Board of Regents, 475 F.2d 707, 710 (6th Cir. 1973). In applying this standard courts recognize that “[legislatures are presumed to have acted constitutionally . . . and their statutory classifications will be set aside only if no grounds can be conceived to justify them.” McDonald v. Board of Election, 394 U.S. 802, 809 , 89 S.Ct. 1404, 1408 , 22 L.Ed.2d 739 (1969). The second and more recent standard, the compelling state interest test, calls for a stricter standard of review where a classification, such as race, is inherently “suspect,” or where a fundamental right of the complaining class is at stake. Under this standard a state must go beyond merely showing that its classification has a rational basis and establish that it is justified b”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.