| City of Mobile v. Bolden
(No. 77-1844)
___ |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Syllabus
| Opinion
[ Stewart ] | Concurrence
[ Blackmun ] | Concurrence
[ Stevens ] | Dissent
[ Brennan ] | Dissent
[ White ] | Dissent
[ Marshall ] |
| HTML version
PDF version | HTML version
PDF version | HTML version
PDF version | HTML version
PDF version | HTML version
PDF version | HTML version
PDF version | HTML version
PDF version |
City of Mobile v. Bolden
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN, dissenting. [*]
I dissent because I agree with MR. JUSTICE MARSHALL that proof of discriminatory impact is sufficient in these cases. I also dissent because, even accepting the plurality's premise that discriminatory purpose must be shown, I agree with MR. JUSTICE MARSHALL and MR. JUSTICE WHITE that the appellees have clearly met that burden.
* [This opinion applies also to No. 7357, Williams et al. v. Brown et al., post, p. 236.]