Supreme Court· 1/27/1975
Chapman v. Meier
Citations
- 420 U.S. 1
- 95 S. Ct. 751
- 42 L. Ed. 2d 766
- 1975 U.S. LEXIS 25
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that a court-ordered reapportionment plan shall not be permitted to deviate as much from strict population equality among districts as a legislatively-created reapportionment
- holding that if a state fails to enact \a constitutionally acceptable\ remedial districting plan, \the responsibility falls on the District Court\
- holding that if a state fails to enact “a constitutionally acceptable” remedial districting plan, “the responsibility falls on the District Court”
- indicating that court-ordered plans should, in some circumstances, defer to, or respect, a state policy of multimember districting
- stating that Mann was in regular contact with Judy about the maps and that she knew that Judy communicated her updates to Speaker Batchelder
- agreeing that \a map that would have given the Democrats a shot at five districts wasn't under consideration\
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Blackmun
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
237 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- City of Mobile v. BoldenSupreme Court· 1980-04-22· cited 783×
- Maher v. RoeSupreme Court· 1977-06-20· cited 748×
- Shaw v. RenoSupreme Court· 1993-06-28· cited 739×
- Miller v. JohnsonSupreme Court· 1995-06-29· cited 626×
- Growe v. EmisonSupreme Court· 1993-02-23· cited 465×
- Voinovich v. QuilterSupreme Court· 1993-03-02· cited 379×
- Davis v. BandemerSupreme Court· 1986-06-30· cited 371×
- Connor v. FinchSupreme Court· 1977-05-31· cited 363×
- East Carroll Parish School Board v. MarshallSupreme Court· 1976-03-08· cited 336×
- League of United Latin American Citizens v. PerrySupreme Court· 2006-06-28· cited 297×
- Wise v. LipscombSupreme Court· 1978-06-22· cited 284×
- Brown v. ThomsonSupreme Court· 1983-06-22· cited 283×
- Branch v. SmithSupreme Court· 2003-03-31· cited 257×
- Abrams v. JohnsonSupreme Court· 1997-06-19· cited 233×
- Upham v. SeamonSupreme Court· 1982-04-01· cited 215×
- McDaniel v. SanchezSupreme Court· 1981-06-01· cited 190×
- Terrazas v. RamirezTexas Supreme Court· 1991-12-17· cited 174×
- State v. RyceSupreme Court of Kansas· 2016-02-26· cited 172×
- Board of Estimate of City of New York v. MorrisSupreme Court· 1989-03-22· cited 138×
- Rev. Roy Jones v. The City of LubbockFifth Circuit· 1984-04-10· cited 135×
Cites
33 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Baker v. CarrSupreme Court· 1962-03-26· cited 6,173×
- Reynolds v. SimsSupreme Court· 1964-10-12· cited 3,703×
- Wesberry v. SandersSupreme Court· 1964-02-17· cited 1,150×
- White v. RegesterSupreme Court· 1973-06-18· cited 771×
- Whitcomb v. ChavisSupreme Court· 1971-06-07· cited 658×
- Gaffney v. CummingsSupreme Court· 1973-06-18· cited 507×
- Burns v. RichardsonSupreme Court· 1966-04-25· cited 476×
- Lucas v. Forty-Fourth General Assembly of ColoradoSupreme Court· 1964-06-15· cited 467×
- Mahan v. HowellSupreme Court· 1973-04-02· cited 441×
- Kirkpatrick v. PreislerSupreme Court· 1969-05-19· cited 404×
- Fortson v. DorseySupreme Court· 1965-01-18· cited 383×
- White v. WeiserSupreme Court· 1973-06-18· cited 320×
- Roman v. SincockSupreme Court· 1964-06-15· cited 317×
- Swann v. AdamsSupreme Court· 1967-01-09· cited 280×
- Maryland Committee for Fair Representation v. TawesSupreme Court· 1964-06-15· cited 273×
- Davis v. MannSupreme Court· 1964-06-15· cited 266×
- WMCA, Inc. v. LomenzoSupreme Court· 1964-06-15· cited 211×
- Connor v. JohnsonSupreme Court· 1971-06-14· cited 191×
- Wells v. RockefellerSupreme Court· 1969-04-07· cited 185×
- Kilgarlin v. HillSupreme Court· 1967-04-10· cited 163×
Other cases named Chapman v. Meier
4 other CourtListener records share this case name.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.