Naacp v. State of California, 711 F.2d 121 (9th Cir. 1983). · Go Syfert
Search
Naacp v. State of California, 711 F.2d 121 (9th Cir. 1983). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
13 citation events (2 in the last 25 years) across 9 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: HRPT Properties Trust v. Lingle (hid, 2010-05-31)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" HRPT Properties Trust v. Lingle
D. Haw. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high
See NAACP v. State of California, 511 F.Supp. 1244, 1251, 1256 (E.D.Cal.1981), affd, 711 F.2d 121 (9th Cir.1983) (allowing suit against the Governor of California based on the Governor’s obligation under the California Constitution to enforce or execute state laws).
discussed Cited "see" Weinstein v. Edgar
N.D. Ill. · 1993 · signal: see · confidence high
See N.A.A.C.P. v. State of California, 511 F.Supp. 1244 , 1255 (E.D.Cal.1981), aff'd, 711 F.2d 121 (9th Cir.1983); Allied Artists Pictures Corp. v. Rhodes, 473 F.Supp. 560, 567 (S.D.Ohio 1979), on reexamination, 496 F.Supp. 408 (S.D.Ohio 1980), modified on other grounds, 679 F.2d 656 (6th Cir.1982); Johnson v. Rockefeller, 58 F.R.D. 42, 45-46 (S.D.N.Y.1972), aff'd, 415 U.S. 953 , 94 S.Ct. 1479 , 39 L.Ed.2d 569 (1974); Socialist Workers Party v. Rockefeller, 314 F.Supp. 984, 988 (S.D.N.Y.), aff'd mem., 400 U.S. 806 , 91 S.Ct. 65 , 27 L.Ed.2d 38 (1970); City of Altus v. Carr, 255 F.Supp. 828, 83…
discussed Cited "see" Los Angeles Branch Naacp v. Los Angeles Unified School District (2×)
9th Cir. · 1983 · signal: see · confidence high
See generally NAACP v. California, 511 F.Supp. 1244 (E.D.Cal.1981), aff'd, 711 F.2d 121 (9th Cir.1983). 29 In the present case, in contrast, the NAACP does not seek to enjoin the Governor from enforcing existing unconstitutional state laws which provide for de jure segregation of the Los Angeles schools.
discussed Cited "see" Los Angeles Branch NAACP v. Los Angeles Unified School District (2×)
9th Cir. · 1983 · signal: see · confidence high
See generally NAACP v. California, 511 F.Supp. 1244 (E.D.Cal.1981), aff’d, 711 F.2d 121 (9th Cir.1983).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Naacp
v.
State of California
17-55849.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
May 31, 1983.
711 F.2d 121
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

711 F.2d 121

NAACP, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 81-4216.

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

Argued April 12, 1982.
Resubmitted May 31, 1983.
Decided May 31, 1983.

Lloyd Harmon, Jr., Deputy County Counsel, Redwood City, Cal., Gerald A. Sherwin, George H. Cunningham, Deputy County Counsel, Stockton, Cal., Geoffrey L. Graybill, Asst. Atty. Gen., Sacramento, Cal., for defendants-appellees.

Eva Paterson, San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiffs-appellants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Milton L. Schwartz, District Judge, Presiding.

Before GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

1

Plaintiff-Appellants' petition for rehearing is denied. Plaintiff-Appellants' petition for "Publication of Opinion" is granted to the extent of the publication of this order. The below decision which was filed May 31, 1983 is hereby ordered published.

2

Appellants appeal the dismissal of their suit for declaratory and injunctive relief. Appellants allege that Proposition I, an amendment to the California constitution that limits the use of busing to remedy segregation resulting from de jure acts, violates the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment. Appellants sought a declaration that Proposition I is unconstitutional and an order enjoining the defendants state officials and state courts from implementing or enforcing its provisions.

3

We are foreclosed by Crawford v. Los Angeles Board of Education, --- U.S. ----, 102 S.Ct. 3211, 73 L.Ed.2d 948 (1982), from granting the relief requested. Hence, we affirm the dismissal solely on that ground.