Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Mineta

532 U.S. 967, 121 S. Ct. 1598, 149 L. Ed. 2d 464, 69 U.S.L.W. 3670, 2001 U.S. LEXIS 2857
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided April 13, 2001·No. No. 00-730·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

C. A. 10th Cir. [Certio[968]*968rari granted, ante, p. 941.] The order granting the petition for writ of certiorari is- amended to read as follows: Certiorari granted limited to the following questions: “1. Whether the Court of Appeals misapplied the strict scrutiny standard in determining if Congress had a compelling interest to enact legislation designed to remedy the effects of racial discrimination? 2. Whether the United States Department of Transportation’s current Disadvantaged Business Enterprise program is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling governmental interest?”

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Mineta, 532 U.S. 967, 121 S. Ct. 1598, 149 L. Ed. 2d 464, 69 U.S.L.W. 3670, 2001 U.S. LEXIS 2857 (2001).

532 U.S. 967 (Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Mineta) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Washington
559 S.E.2d 636 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 2002)
In Re Santos Y.
112 Cal. Rptr. 2d 692 (California Court of Appeal, 2001)
Los Angeles County Department of Children & Family Services v. Arturo G.
92 Cal. App. 4th 1274 (California Court of Appeal, 2001)
L. Feriozzi Concrete Co. v. Crda
776 A.2d 254 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2001)