Hunter v. Erickson, 393 U.S. 385 (1969)

E809988

Hunter v. Erickson, 393 U.S. 385 (1969), is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that a city charter amendment imposing special voting requirements for fair housing laws violated the Equal Protection Clause by restructuring the political process to disadvantage racial minorities.

Try in SPARQL Jump to: Statements Referenced by

Statements (47)

Predicate Object
instanceOf United States Supreme Court case
landmark equal protection case
appliedStandardOfReview strict scrutiny
areaOfLaw civil rights law
constitutional law
election law
challengedProvision Akron city charter amendment
citation 393 U.S. 385
constitutionalProvisionInterpreted Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment NERFINISHED
constitutionalRightProtected equal protection of the laws
country United States of America
surface form: United States
court Supreme Court of the United States
decisionDate 1969
dissentBy Justice John M. Harlan II NERFINISHED
effect invalidated Akron’s charter amendment requiring referenda for fair housing ordinances
fullName Hunter v. Erickson NERFINISHED
holding a city charter amendment requiring voter approval for any ordinance regulating real estate transactions on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin or ancestry violates the Equal Protection Clause
a city may not restructure its political process in a way that places special burdens on racial minorities seeking legislation
impact limited the ability of local governments to single out race-related legislation for special political hurdles
issue validity of a city charter amendment imposing special voting requirements for fair housing ordinances
jurisdiction United States of America
surface form: United States
legalDoctrine political process doctrine
legalPrinciple government may not make it more difficult for racial minorities to enact beneficial legislation than for other groups
legalRule laws that place special burdens on racial minorities in the political process are subject to strict scrutiny
locationOfOriginatingDispute Akron, Ohio NERFINISHED
lowerCourt Supreme Court of Ohio NERFINISHED
lowerCourtDisposition upheld the charter amendment
majorityOpinionBy Justice Byron R. White NERFINISHED
page 385
party Erickson (defendant) NERFINISHED
Hunter (plaintiff) NERFINISHED
principleAppliedTo racial classifications in political decision-making structures
reasoning the amendment placed special burdens on racial minorities seeking to secure fair housing protections
the charter amendment explicitly treated racial housing ordinances differently from other ordinances
recognizedAs key precedent on political restructuring and minority rights
relatedCase Reitman v. Mulkey, 387 U.S. 369 (1967) NERFINISHED
Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, 572 U.S. 291 (2014) NERFINISHED
Washington v. Seattle School District No. 1, 458 U.S. 457 (1982) NERFINISHED
reporter United States Reports
subjectMatter fair housing
municipal referendum requirements
racial discrimination in housing
SupremeCourtDisposition reversed the judgment of the Supreme Court of Ohio
topic racially targeted political restructuring
referendum requirements for civil rights legislation
volume 393
vote 8–1 decision

Referenced by (1)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.