Moose Lodge No. v. Irvis (107 )
Significance, The Issues At Stake, The Supreme Court Decides
Moose Lodge No. 107
That discrimination against an African American man by a private lodge is not "state action" because the state granted the lodge a liquor license.
Chief Lawyer for Appellant
Frederick Bernays Wiener
Chief Lawyer for Appellee
Harry J. Rubin
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, Warren E. Burger, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), Potter Stewart, Byron R. White
William J. Brennan, Jr., William O. Douglas, Thurgood Marshall
Date of Decision
12 June 1972
The Moose Lodge is a private club in which the state takes no controlling interest. Therefore, discrimination by the club cannot be outlawed under federal law.
- The Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883).
- Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1 (1948).
- Burton v. Wilmington Parking Authority, 365 U.S. 715 (1961).
- Reitman v. Mulkey, 387 U.S. 369 (1967).
- Bartholomew, Paul Charles. Summaries of Leading Cases on the Constitution. Totowa, NJ: Rowan & Allanheld, 1983.
- Ducat, Craig R., and Harold W. Chase. Constitutional Interpretation. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Company, 1988.
- Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1986.
- National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Button - The Battle For Desegregation, The Naacp Sues, Petitioner's Claims, State's Interests Do Not Justify Suppression Of Speech
- Miranda v. Arizona - Significance, Tainted Evidence, Conviction Overturned, Impact, Miranda Rights, Further Readings
- Moose Lodge No. v. Irvis (107 ) - Significance
- Moose Lodge No. v. Irvis (107 ) - The Issues At Stake
- Moose Lodge No. v. Irvis (107 ) - The Supreme Court Decides
- Other Free Encyclopedias