Symm v. United States

Symm v. United States, 439 U.S. 1105 (1979), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court summarily affirmed United States v. Texas,[1] holding unconstitutional the denial to Prairie View students of the presumption of bona fide residency extended to other Waller County students.[2]

Symm v. United States
Decided January 15, 1979
Full case nameLeRoy Symm, Tax Assessor-Collector of Waller County, Texas v. United States, et al.
Citations439 U.S. 1105 (more)
99 S. Ct. 1006; 59 L. Ed. 2d 66; 1979 U.S. LEXIS 449
Case history
PriorUnited States v. Texas, 445 F. Supp. 1245 (S.D. Tex. 1978)
SubsequentRehearing denied, 440 U.S. 951 (1979).
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr. · Potter Stewart
Byron White · Thurgood Marshall
Harry Blackmun · Lewis F. Powell Jr.
William Rehnquist · John P. Stevens
s
DissentRehnquist, joined by Burger

Background

Waller County, a small rural county west of Houston, had a population of approximately 15,000, a slight majority of which was black. Prairie View A&M University is a state-supported, predominately black university located in Waller County. Appellant Symm was responsible for registering voters in the county. Persons personally known to Symm or his deputies as county residents, as well as persons who were listed on the tax rolls as owning property in Waller County, were routinely registered upon filling out the state registration form. Those who fell within neither of these categories were required to complete a residency questionnaire, which asked whether the applicant was a college student and, if so, inquired into the student's home address, property ownership, employment status, future plans, and so forth.

On October 14, 1976, the United States Attorney General filed an action against Symm, Waller County, the State of Texas, and its Secretary of State and Attorney General, alleging that use of the questionnaire denied Prairie View students the right to vote in violation of 42 U. S. C. §§ 1971 (a), 1971 (c), 1973, 1973j (d), 1973bb, and the Fourteenth, Fifteenth, and Twenty-sixth Amendments. Pursuant to 42 U. S. C. § 1973bb (a)(2),[3] the United States moved to convene a three-judge District Court. The request for a three-judge court was predicated on the United States' claim for injunctive relief to remedy alleged violations of the Twenty-sixth Amendment. The motion was granted, and a [*1107] three-judge District Court was convened. The District Court found that Symm's registration practices violated the Twenty-sixth Amendment and permanently enjoined him from, among other things, using the questionnaire. Symm appealed from that judgment.

Opinion of the Court

The Court summarily affirmed the appeal (i.e. wrote no opinion).

Dissent

Justice William Rehnquist wrote a dissent, arguing that the District Court mistakenly exercised jurisdiction over Symm. Renquish opined, "If the case were here ... on a petition for certiorari and fell within our discretionary jurisdiction, I would have no hesitation in voting to deny certiorari."

gollark: It supports more of the SQL standards, I guess.
gollark: Also use postgres.
gollark: That's utterly horrific, steamport. Some offense.
gollark: Requires according to some spec, not practically.
gollark: <@178948413851697152> I think PATCH requires some specific format to specify an update. I probably would use POST or maybe PUT.

References
  1. United States v. Texas, 445 F. Supp. 1245 (S.D. Tex. 1978).
  2. Symm v. United States, 439 U.S. 1105 (1979).
  3. "The district courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction of proceedings instituted under [§ 1973bb], which shall be heard and determined by a court of three judges in accordance with section 2284 of title 28, and any appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court." 42 U. S. C. § 1973bb (a)(2).

Further reading
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.