It’s the 12 Days of Ballotpedia! Your gift powers the trusted, unbiased information voters need heading into 2026. Donate now!

MITCHELL v. FORSYTH (1985)

From Ballotpedia
Revision as of 15:10, 23 April 2024 by Matt Latourelle (contribs) (historical scotus page set)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Seal of the Supreme Court of the United States
MITCHELL v. FORSYTH
Term: 1984
Important Dates
Argued: February 27, 1985
Decided: June 19, 1985
Outcome
Affirmed and reversed (or vacated) in part
Vote
4-3
Majority
Harry BlackmunByron White
Concurring
William BrennanThurgood Marshall
Dissenting
Warren BurgerSandra Day O'ConnorJohn Paul Stevens

MITCHELL v. FORSYTH is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on June 19, 1985. The case was argued before the court on February 27, 1985.

In a 4-3 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed and reversed (or vacated) in part the ruling of the lower court. The case originated from the Pennsylvania Eastern U.S. District Court.

For a full list of cases decided in the 1980s, click here. For a full list of cases decided by the Burger Court, click here.

[1]

About the case

  • Subject matter: Economic Activity - Liability, governmental: tort or contract actions by or against government or governmental officials other than defense of criminal actions brought under a civil rights action.
  • Petitioner: attorney general of the United States, or his office
  • Petitioner state: Unknown
  • Respondent type: Protester, demonstrator, picketer or pamphleteer (non-employment related), or non-indigent loiterer
  • Respondent state: Unknown
  • Citation: 472 U.S. 511
  • How the court took jurisdiction: Cert
  • What type of decision was made: Opinion of the court (orally argued)
  • Who was the chief justice: Warren Burger
  • Who wrote the majority opinion: Byron White

These data points were accessed from The Supreme Court Database, which also attempts to categorize the ideological direction of the court's ruling in each case. This case's ruling was categorized as conservative.

See also

External links

Footnotes