Williams v. Moss

Supreme Court

Williams v. Moss

378 U.S. 558, 84 S. Ct. 1907, 12 L. Ed. 2d 1026, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 845

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedJune 22, 1964

Docket476

StatusPublished

Cited by18 cases

This text of 378 U.S. 558 (Williams v. Moss) 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

Williams v. Moss, 378 U.S. 558, 84 S. Ct. 1907, 12 L. Ed. 2d 1026, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 845 (1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment below is affirmed on the merits. Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533. The cases are 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.

Mr. Justice Clark would affirm on the merits 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 Oklahoma’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.

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

Per Curiam.

The judgment below is affirmed on the merits. Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533. The cases are 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.

Mr. Justice Clark would affirm on the merits 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 Oklahoma’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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

378 U.S. 558, 84 S. Ct. 1907, 12 L. Ed. 2d 1026, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 845, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-moss-scotus-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack