establishment clause (Mississippi) · Go Syfert
← Mississippi issues

establishment clause in Mississippi

8 Mississippi opinions name it 1 courts 1950–2005 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Mississippi courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi.

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (8)

CaseCitedYears
Walz v. Tax Comm'n of City of New York green
scotus · 1970
2 sentences

2005Our current interpretive guidance for an Establishment Clause analysis is Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 , 91 S.Ct. 2135 , 29 L.Ed.2d 745 (1971), which describes the primary purpose of the Establishment Clause as preventing "sponsorship, financial support, and active involvement of the sovereign in religious activity." Id. at 612 (quoting from Walz v. Tax Comm'n, 397 U.S. 664, 668 , 90 S.Ct. 1409 , 25 L.Ed.2d 697 (1970)). ś 29.

2005Our current interpretive guidance for an Establishment Clause analysis is Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 , 91 S.Ct. 2135 , 29 L.Ed.2d 745 (1971), which describes the primary purpose of the Establishment Clause as preventing "sponsorship, financial support, and active involvement of the sovereign in religious activity." Id. at 612 (quoting from Walz v. Tax Comm'n, 397 U.S. 664, 668 , 90 S.Ct. 1409 , 25 L.Ed.2d 697 (1970)). ś 29.

22003–2005
Lemon v. Kurtzman red
scotus · 1971
2 sentences

2005Our current interpretive guidance for an Establishment Clause analysis is Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 , 91 S.Ct. 2135 , 29 L.Ed.2d 745 (1971), which describes the primary purpose of the Establishment Clause as preventing "sponsorship, financial support, and active involvement of the sovereign in religious activity." Id. at 612 (quoting from Walz v. Tax Comm'n, 397 U.S. 664, 668 , 90 S.Ct. 1409 , 25 L.Ed.2d 697 (1970)). ś 29.

2005Our current interpretive guidance for an Establishment Clause analysis is Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 , 91 S.Ct. 2135 , 29 L.Ed.2d 745 (1971), which describes the primary purpose of the Establishment Clause as preventing "sponsorship, financial support, and active involvement of the sovereign in religious activity." Id. at 612 (quoting from Walz v. Tax Comm'n, 397 U.S. 664, 668 , 90 S.Ct. 1409 , 25 L.Ed.2d 697 (1970)). ś 29.

22003–2005
Thayer v. South Carolina Tax Commission green
sc · 1992
2 sentences

1998Thayer, 413 S.E.2d at 813-14 .

1996Thayer, 413 S.E.2d at 813-14 .

21996–1998
Batson v. Kentucky green
scotus · 1986
2 sentences

1987Batson holds that a state criminal defendant establishes a prima facie case of such a violation on a showing (1) that he is a member of a "cognizable racial group," (2) that the prosecutor has exercised peremptory challenges toward the elimination of veniremen of the defendant's race and (3) that attendant facts and circumstances infer that these challenges were made for the purpose of striking minorities from the jury. ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. at 1722-23 , 90 L.Ed.2d at 87 .

1987Batson holds that a state criminal defendant establishes a prima facie case of such a violation on a showing (1) that he is a member of a "cognizable racial group," (2) that the prosecutor has exercised peremptory challenges toward the elimination of veniremen of the defendant's race and (3) that attendant facts and circumstances infer that these challenges were made for the purpose of striking minorities from the jury. ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. at 1722-23 , 90 L.Ed.2d at 87 .

11987–1987
Webster v. Kennebrew green
miss · 1983
1 sentence

1984Webster v. Kennebrew, 443 So.2d 850 (Miss. 1983).

11984–1984
Herrington v. Herrington green
miss · 1957
2 sentences

1982The best illustration of the limitations of the Mississippi dead man's statute is found in Herrington v. Herrington, 232 Miss. 244 , 98 So.2d 646 (1957), wherein we upheld the establishment of the claim by the claimant's own spouse.

1982The best illustration of the limitations of the Mississippi dead man's statute is found in Herrington v. Herrington, 232 Miss. 244 , 98 So.2d 646 (1957), wherein we upheld the establishment of the claim by the claimant's own spouse.

11982–1982
Grantham v. State neutral
· 1941
2 sentences

1950This case does not contain the features .present in the border line cases of Brown v. State, 192 Miss. 314 , 5 So. (2d) 426 , and Grantham v. State, 190 Miss. 887 , 2 So. (2d) 150, 151 .

1950This case does not contain the features .present in the border line cases of Brown v. State, 192 Miss. 314 , 5 So. (2d) 426 , and Grantham v. State, 190 Miss. 887 , 2 So. (2d) 150, 151 .

11950–1950
Brown v. State neutral
· 1941
2 sentences

1950This case does not contain the features .present in the border line cases of Brown v. State, 192 Miss. 314 , 5 So. (2d) 426 , and Grantham v. State, 190 Miss. 887 , 2 So. (2d) 150, 151 .

1950This case does not contain the features .present in the border line cases of Brown v. State, 192 Miss. 314 , 5 So. (2d) 426 , and Grantham v. State, 190 Miss. 887 , 2 So. (2d) 150, 151 .

11950–1950

Where else courts name it

CA 89 (1921–2025) NY 53 (1861–2026) FL 43 (1938–2026) OH 42 (1953–2025) WA 42 (1895–2026) MI 39 (1909–2020) IL 39 (1887–2021) PA 39 (1917–2024) NJ 37 (1897–2019) WI 31 (1844–2020) MA 29 (1910–2018) TX 28 (1912–2023) MD 24 (1914–2023) CO 24 (1892–2015) CT 22 (1923–2025) OR 22 (1895–2025) MN 17 (1926–2016) AL 16 (1868–2015) AR 15 (1908–2021) OK 14 (1913–2024) IA 13 (1877–2018) NM 12 (1888–2015) LA 12 (1917–2000) TN 12 (1917–2013) GA 11 (1925–2023) NE 10 (1886–2003) AZ 10 (1960–2016) MO 10 (1906–2011) KS 10 (1901–1996) KY 9 (1899–2023) MS 8 (1950–2005) UT 8 (1986–2022) IN 8 (1942–2005) VA 8 (1925–2015) ME 7 (1844–2006) ID 7 (1890–1996) NC 7 (1874–2011) MT 6 (1878–2012) SC 5 (1846–2021) VT 5 (1979–2017) DC 5 (1982–1997) HI 5 (1987–2020) ND 4 (1895–1986) AK 4 (1979–2022) NV 4 (1959–2022) WV 4 (1950–2014) NH 4 (1967–1995) RI 2 (1919–1980) DE 2 (1974–1990) PR 2 (1942–1956)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check