top of page
Search

Today in Supreme Court History: July 11

  • 3 hours ago
  • 1 min read

Organized Village of Kake v. Egan, 80 S.Ct. 33 (decided July 11, 1959): Brennan grants restraining order preventing Alaska from enforcing statute criminalizing fish traps against Native American tribe because Secretary of Interior had granted exemption and its livelihood depended on them.  (Question on direct appeal was whether Secretary’s authority superseded Alaska’s.  The Alaska Supreme Court ended up ruling against the Native Americans, and the Court affirmed in 1962, 369 U.S. 60, though Douglas, opposing extending the stay to the end of that fishing reason, derided traps as a “lazy man’s device”.)


Rockefeller v. Socialist Workers Party, 400 U.S. 1201 (decided July 11, 1970): Harlan grants stay of District Court order striking down on Equal Protection grounds requirement that the 12,000 voters needed for petition for statewide ballot include at least 50 voters from each county because it overvalued votes in less populous counties (i.e., giving those counties disproportionate veto power over who gets onto the ballot) (the least populous county, Hamilton, had only 1/500th the population of the most, Kings/Brooklyn) (order was affirmed by the Court without opinion on October 12 of that year, 400 U.S. 806, though District Court decision shows that SWP lost on other issues)

 
 
 

Recent Posts

See All
Today in Supreme Court History: July 10

Turner v. Quarterman, 554 U.S. 933 (decided July 10, 2008): Stay of execution denied, as it had been by Fifth Circuit, but we learn from the Fifth Circuit dissent that defendant’s argument -- that he

 
 
 
Today in Supreme Court History: July 10

McGirt v. Oklahoma, 591 U.S. 894 (decided July 9, 2020): Oklahoma had no jurisdiction to try Native American because alleged crime occurred on what was still technically a reservation despite long his

 
 
 
Today in Supreme Court History: July 8

Secretary of the Navy v. Avrech, 418 U.S. 676 (decided July 8, 1974): soldier busted down to private for publishing a “disloyal” statement; Court refuses to hear case because service personnel do not

 
 
 

Comments


Thanks for submitting!

bottom of page