|
 Can't find a case on our website? Search our new case database for access to hundreds of open and closed cases.
|
Equality Under the Law Program
 |
Abigail Fisher v. University of Texas
This case asks whether the admissions policies and procedures at the University of Texas at Austin (UT) which grant preferences to students of certain races and ethnic backgrounds violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Read more
|
 |
Associated General Contractors et al v. California Department of Transportation
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has launched a new program that uses race- and sex-based quotas in awarding contracts on federally funded highway projects. This quota program violates both the U.S. Constitution (Fourteenth Amendment) and the California Constitution. Read more
|
 |
Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action v. Granholm
The voters of Michigan adopted Proposal 2, a sister initiative to California’s Proposition 209. Proposal 2 ends race- and sex-based discrimination and preferences in public contracting, education, and employment. BAMN and the ACLU filed lawsuits alleging that Proposal 2 violates the federal Equal Protection Clause as applied to higher education. Read more
|
 |
Connerly, et al. v. State of California, et. al.
Challenges to Cal. Gov't Code § 8252(g) requirement that the California Citizen Redistricting Commission use race, ethnicity, and sex in selecting six members to the Commission in violation of Proposition 209. Read more
|
 |
Coral v. Martin (& Schram)
Publicly flouting Proposition 209, San Francisco extended its race- and sex-based public contracting program to 2008. Since 1984, San Francisco has been enforcing a series of public contracting ordinances that discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, minority- and women-owned businesses. When the program was set to expire in June, 2003, the City quickly extended the illegal program for another five years. Read more
|
 |
Shelby v. Holder
This case challenges the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Section 5 requires covered states and jurisdictions to obtain approval from the federal government before implementing even the most trivial changes to voting procedures. Read more
|
Looking for more cases?
 PLF is involved in hundreds of cases across the country. Our new case database is your gateway to all of them!
|