1 minute read

United Jewish Organizations v. Carey

Significance, Points Of Affirmation, Impact, Further Readings

Petitioner

United Jewish Organizations of Williamsburgh, Inc.

Respondents

Carey, Governor of New York, et al.

Petitioner's Claim

The redistricting plan of 1974 for portions of Kings County, New York, would negate the effectiveness of the Hasidic Jew vote. The petitioner claimed that the sole purpose of the redistricting was to achieve a racial quota, and the community was assigned to voting districts solely by racial standards. They claimed this violated their rights under both the Fourteenth Amendment and the Fifteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Chief Lawyer for Petitioner

Nathan Lewin

Chief Lawyer for Respondents

George D. Zuckerman, Assistant Attorney General of New York

Justices for the Court

Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr., Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist, John Paul Stevens, Potter Stewart, Byron R. White (writing for the Court)

Justices Dissenting

Warren E. Burger (Thurgood Marshall did not participate)

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

1 March 1977

Decision

The reapportionment plan was valid under the U.S. Constitution and did not violate the constitutional rights of the Hasidic Jews.

Related Cases

  • Gomillion v. Lightfoot, 364 U.S. 339 (1960).
  • Richmond v. United States, 422 U.S. 358 (1975).
  • Beer v. United States, 425 U.S. 130 (1976).
  • Mobile v. Bolden, 446 U.S. 55 (1980).
  • Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630 (1993).
  • Miller v. Johnson, 515 U.S. 900 (1995).

Additional topics

Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1973 to 1980