You are here

Prior Cases

A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | R | S | T | U | V | W | Z

At issue in Tanco v. Haslam was the constitutionality of Tennessee’s discriminatory marriage laws.  Three same-sex couples validly married outside the state challenged Tennessee laws that prohibited the state from recognizing their marriages and that excluded them from the benefits of marriage available to married opposite-sex couples.  

At issue in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project was whether disparate impact claims of racial discrimination can be brought under Section 804(a) of the Fair Housing Act.

Texas v. United States was a federal court challenge to President Obama’s 2014 executive action on immigration.

In Town of Chester v. Laroe Estates, Inc., the Supreme Court considered whether a party seeking to intervene in a case under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure must demonstrate that it possesses Article III standing.

At issue in Township of Mt. Holly v. Mt. Holly Gardens Citizens in Action was whether housing practices and policies that have a disparate impact on minorities were a violation of the Fair Housing Act of 1968, legislation enacted to combat discrimination in both rental and home ownership markets.  Current and former residents of Mt. Holly Gardens challenged a redevelopment plan by Mt. Holly Township, New Jersey, as a violation of Section 804(a) of the Fair Housing Act.  After the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit overturned a lower court ruling that had failed to properly evaluate the Gardens residents’ evidence of disparate impact and remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings, the Supreme Court granted review.

On July 10, 2012, Constitutional Accountability Center filed Tuaua v. United States in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, seeking to vindicate the Constitution’s guarantee of citizenship at birth and contesting the constitutionality of federal laws and policies that deny U.S. citizenship to persons born in the U.S. territory of American Samoa. The lawsuit was filed by CAC, the law firm of Arnold & Porter LLP, and prominent American Samoa attorney Charles V. Ala’ilima, on behalf of Leneuoti Tuaua and other individuals born in American Samoa, as well as the Samoan Federation of America.

On June 26, 2013, Judge Leon granted the government’s motion and dismissed the case, holding that “unincorporated territories” like American Samoa are not within the “United States” for purposes of the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and that persons born in American Samoa therefore are not entitled to constitutional citizenship at birth.