Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 20 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Reitman v. Mulkey.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Reitman v. Mulkey Anchor | green | “significantly involved itself with invidious discriminations,” | 11 |
| 2 | Peterson v. City of Greenville | green | “commanded a particular result,” | 3 |
| 3 | Peterson v. City of Greenville | green | “when the state has commanded a particular result, it has saved to itself the power to determine that result and thereby 'to a significant extent' has 'become involved' in it.” | 3 |
| 4 | Carl L. Baldwin and Alexinia Baldwin v. J. W. Morgan | green | “the very act of posting and maintaining separate waiting room facilities when done by the railroad terminal as commanded by these state orders is action by the state.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.