Supreme Court of the United States, 1964

Williams v. Moss

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided June 22, 1964 · Sims, Clause

378 U.S. 558; 84 S. Ct. 1907; 12 L. Ed. 2d 1026; 1964 U.S. LEXIS 845 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Charles Nesbitt, Attorney General of Oklahoma, for appellants in No. 476., Frank Carter for appellants in No. 534., Jim A. Rinehart for appellants in No. 546., Sid White for appellee Moss in No. 476., Norman E. Reynolds, Jr., pro se, appellee in Nos. 476 and 534., Delmer L. Stagner and LeRoy Powers for Council of Democratic Neighborhood Clubs in Nos. 476 and 534.

Cases that cite this one

13 later published cases cite this decision.

Egan v. Hammond (Alaska 1972)
Baker v. Carr (District Court, M.D. Tennessee 1965)
Harris v. Anderson (Kan. 1965)
Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Dunn (District Court, M.D. Tennessee 1972)
Butcher v. Bloom (Pa. 1966)
Sims v. Amos (United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama 1972)
Schaefer v. Thomson (District Court, D. Wyoming 1964)
Honsey v. Donovan (D. Minn. 1964)
Contreras v. Illinois State Board of Elections (District Court, N.D. Illinois 2021)
McConchie v. Illinois State Board of Elections (District Court, N.D. Illinois 2021)
Gill v. Whitford (Supreme Court of the United States 2018)
Parsons v. Buckley (Supreme Court of the United States 1965)
Guntert v. Richardson (Haw. 1964)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment below is affirmed on the merits. Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533. The cases are remanded for further proceedings, with respect to relief, consistent with the views stated in our opinions in Reynolds v. Sims and in the other cases relating to state legislative apportionment decided along with Reynolds, should that become necessary.

Mr. Justice Clark would affirm on the merits on the grounds stated in his opinion in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533, 587. Mr. Justice Stewart would affirm the judgment insofar as it holds that Oklahoma’s system of legislative apportionment violates the Equal Protection Clause. Mr. Justice Harlan dissents for the reasons stated in his dissenting opinion in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533, 589.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.