42 U.S.C. § 2000d
Prohibition against exclusion from participation in, denial of benefits of, and discrimination under federally assisted programs on ground of race, color, or national origin
No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2,973
cases (782 in the last 5 years), 1965–2026 · leading case: Alexander v. Sandoval
Alexander v. Sandoval (2001)
“252 , as amended, 42 U. S. C. § 2000d et seq. Section 601 of that Title provides that no person shall, "on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or…”
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)
“The Superior Court of California sustained respondent's challenge, holding that petitioner's program violated the California Constitution, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U. S. C. § 2000d et seq., and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
Lane v. Pena (1996)
“1845 , 42 U. S. C. § 2000d7, reveals congressional intent to equalize the remedies available against all defendants for § 504(a) violations.”
Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)
“We granted certiorari in this case to decide whether "the University of Michigan's use of racial preferences in undergraduate *250 admissions violate[s] the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U. S. C. § 2000d), or 42…”
Guardians Assn. v. Civil Serv. Comm'n of New York City (1983)
“252 , as amended, 42 U. S. C. §2000d et seq., 1 and administrative implementing regulations promulgated thereunder.”
Fullilove v. Klutznick (1980)
“Refusals to subcontract work to minority contractors may, depending upon the identity of the discriminating party, violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U. S. C. § 2000d et seq., or 42 U. S. C.”
Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College (2023)
“252 , 42 U. S. C. § 2000d et seq., and the Equal Protection Clause of the Four- teenth Amendment.”
Franklin v. Gwinnett County Public Schools (1992)
“The court noted that analysis of Title IX and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U. S. C. § 2000d et seq. (Title VI), has developed along similar lines.”
Blunt v. Lower Merion School District (2014)
“§ 794 (a); Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VI”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000d; 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ; and state law, claiming that African American students in the LMSD suffered from such discrimination.”
Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education (2005)
“, which provides in § 601 that no person shall, "on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity" covered by Title VI.”
Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School District (1998)
“678, 684 (1946), coupled with Congress' abrogation of the States' Eleventh Amendment immunity under Title IX, see 42 U. S. C. § 2000d7, led us to conclude in Franklin that Title IX recognizes a damages remedy, 503 U.”
Rachel Evans v. James T. Lynn v. The Town of New Castle, Appellee-Intervenor (1976)
“OAKES, Circuit Judge: This appeal involves a legal challenge against policies of federal agencies said to flout the requirements of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq., and Title VIII (Fair Housing) of the 1968 Civil Rights Act, 42 U.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 2000d(1) — 1 case
Ates v. United States (2020)
— 42 U.S.C. § 2000d(2) — 1 case
— 42 U.S.C. § 2000d(4)(a) — 1 case
— 42 U.S.C. § 2000d(b) — 1 case
Liberles v. Daniel (1979)
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.