Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Hill v. Davis 378 U.S. 565

← Cases

Hill v. Davis

378 U.S. 565 Court SCOTUS Decision date 1964-06-22 Docket No. 1079 English

Judges Mr. Justice Clark would affirm on the grounds stated in his opinion in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533, 587.; Mr. Justice Stewart would affirm the judgment insofar as it holds that Iowa’s system of legislative apportionment violates the Equal Protection Clause.; Mr. Justice Harlan dissents for the reasons stated in his dissenting opinion in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533, 589.

Delivered by Per Curiam.

Contents

Majority

p. 565
HILL, AUDITOR OF CLARKE COUNTY, IOWA, et al. v. DAVIS et al.
No. 1079.
Decided June 22, 1964.
Ward, Reynoldson for appellants.
Robert F. Wilson for appellees.

The judgment below is affirmed. Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533 . The case is remanded for further proceedings, with respect to relief, consistent with the views stated in our opinions in Reynolds v. Sims and in the other cases relating to state legislative apportionment decided along with Reynolds, should that become necessary. Since this appeal presents no question as to the correctness of the District Court’s later decision upholding the validity of the temporary reapportionment plan enacted by the Iowa General Assembly in February 1964, we do not consider or pass upon this matter.

Mr. Justice Clark would affirm on the grounds stated in his opinion in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533 , 587.

Mr. Justice Stewart would affirm the judgment insofar as it holds that Iowa’s system of legislative apportionment violates the Equal Protection Clause.

Mr. Justice Harlan dissents for the reasons stated in his dissenting opinion in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533 , 589.

Cases cited