Martinez v. Bynum
Significance, An 8-1 Decision, Marshall Dissents, Impact, Related Cases
Petitioner
Oralia Martinez
Respondent
Raymond L. Bynum
Petitioner's Claim
The Texas Education Code 21.031(d) violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because it denied tuition-free public schooling to minors who were living away from a "parent, guardian, or other person having lawful control of him" for the sole purpose of attending "public, free schools" in the state of Texas.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Edward J. Tuddenham
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Richard L. Arnett
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr., Warren E. Burger, Sandra Day O'Connor, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., (writing for the Court), William H. Rehnquist, John Paul Stevens, Byron R. White
Justices Dissenting
Thurgood Marshall
Place
Washington D.C.
Date of Decision
2 May 1983
Decision
The Supreme Court held that Texas Education Code did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. States were permitted by the Constitution to extend the availability of tuition-free education only to bona fide residents.
Further Readings
Additional topics
- Maryland v. Garrison - Significance, Latitude For Honest Mistakes Made By Officers, Evidence Against The Victim Of Police Error Should Not Be Used
- Marsh v. Chambers - Significance, Is There An American Civil Religion?, A Nation In Change, Impact, Further Readings
- Martinez v. Bynum - Significance
- Martinez v. Bynum - An 8-1 Decision
- Martinez v. Bynum - Marshall Dissents
- Martinez v. Bynum - Impact
- Martinez v. Bynum - Related Cases
- Other Free Encyclopedias
Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1981 to 1988