Martin v. Bush

Supreme Court

Martin v. Bush

376 U.S. 222, 84 S. Ct. 709, 11 L. Ed. 2d 656, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 1704

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedMarch 2, 1964

Docket675

StatusPublished

Cited by25 cases

This text of 376 U.S. 222 (Martin v. Bush) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Martin v. Bush, 376 U.S. 222, 84 S. Ct. 709, 11 L. Ed. 2d 656, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 1704 (1964).

Pincite

Opinion

*223 Pee Curiam.

The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed on the authority of Wesberry v. Sanders, ante, p. 1, without prejudice to the right of the appellants to apply by April 1, 1964, to the District Court for further equitable relief in light of the present circumstances including the imminence of the forthcoming election and “the operation of the election machinery of Texas” noted by the District Court in its opinion. * The stay heretofore granted by Mr. Justice Black is continued in effect pending timely application for the foregoing relief and final disposition thereof by the District Court.

Mr. Justice Clark joins this disposition, but upon the grounds stated in his separate opinion in Wesberry v. Sanders, ante, p. 18. Mr. Justice Harlan and Mr. Justice Stewart would reverse the judgment below for the reasons stated in their dissenting opinions in Wesberry v. Sanders, ante, pp. 20, 50.

*

224 F. Supp. 499, 513.

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

*223 Pee Curiam.

The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed on the authority of Wesberry v. Sanders, ante, p. 1, without prejudice to the right of the appellants to apply by April 1, 1964, to the District Court for further equitable relief in light of the present circumstances including the imminence of the forthcoming election and “the operation of the election machinery of Texas” noted by the District Court in its opinion. * The stay heretofore granted by Mr. Justice Black is continued in effect pending timely application for the foregoing relief and final disposition thereof by the District Court.

Mr. Justice Clark joins this disposition, but upon the grounds stated in his separate opinion in Wesberry v. Sanders, ante, p. 18. Mr. Justice Harlan and Mr. Justice Stewart would reverse the judgment below for the reasons stated in their dissenting opinions in Wesberry v. Sanders, ante, pp. 20, 50.

*

224 F. Supp. 499, 513.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

376 U.S. 222, 84 S. Ct. 709, 11 L. Ed. 2d 656, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 1704, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-bush-scotus-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack