Fullilove v. Klutznick

Petitioners

H. Earl Fullilove, et al.

Respondent

Philip M. Klutznick, U.S. Secretary of Commerce

Petitioners' Claim

That a provision in the law requiring that ten percent of all federal funds for local public works projects go to minority-owned businesses violates the U.S. Constitution.

Chief Lawyers for Petitioners

Robert G. Benisch, Robert J. Hickey

Chief Lawyer for Respondent

Drew S. Days III

Justices for the Court

Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr., Warren E. Burger (writing for the Court), Thurgood Marshall, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., Byron R. White

Justices Dissenting

William H. Rehnquist, John Paul Stevens, Potter Stewart

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

2 July 1980

Decision

Affirmed lower court rulings rejecting the petitioners' claim that minority "set-asides" were unconstitutional.

Significance

The decision in Fullilove v. Klutznick clarified the U.S. Supreme Court's position on the constitutionality of minority set-aside programs. This directly impacted Congress' ability to craft future laws designed to address discrimination in a variety of industries.

Impact

In the wake of the Fullilove v. Klutznick decision, Congress enacted a number of new minority set-aside programs. State and local governments followed suit, although a number of those laws were later struck down in court.

Related Cases

• South Dakota v. Dole, 483 U.S. 203 (1987).
• Richmond v. J. A. Croson Co., 488 U.S. 469 (1989).
• Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena, 512 U.S. 200 (1995).

Sources

Constitutional Law, 13th ed. New York: The Foundation Press Inc., 1997.