Supreme Court of the United States, 1975

White v. Regester

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided June 30, 1975 · Douglas

422 U.S. 935; 95 S. Ct. 2670; 45 L. Ed. 2d 662; 1975 U.S. LEXIS 87 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Elizabeth B. Levatino, Special Assistant Attorney General of Texas, argued the cause for appellants. With her on the briefs were John L. Hill, Attorney General, Larry F. York, former First Assistant Attorney General, and David M. Kendall, First Assistant Attorney General., David R. Richards argued the cause for appellees Regester et al. With him on the brief were Jack Green-berg, James M. Nabrit III, J. Phillip Crawford, Oscar H. Mauzy, Wm. Terry Bray, Sanford Jay Rosen, and George J. Korbel. Don Gladden argued the cause for appellees Escalante et al. With him on the briefs was Marvin Collins.

Cases that cite this one

17 later published cases cite this decision. The 16 that cite it most often are listed here.

Graves v. Barnes (District Court, W.D. Texas 1976)
Graves v. Barnes (District Court, W.D. Texas 1977)
Session v. Perry (District Court, E.D. Texas 2004)
Terrazas v. Ramirez (Tex. 1991)
League of United Latin American Citizens, Council No. 4434 v. Clements (5th Cir. 1993)
Legal Assistance For Vietnamese Asylum Seekers; Thua Van Le v. Department Of State, Bureau Of Consular Affairs, Et Al. (D.C. Cir. 1995)
Legal Assistance for Vietnamese Asylum Seekers v. Department of State, Bureau of Consular Affairs (D.C. Cir. 1995)
League of United Latin American Citizens, Council No. 4434 v. Clements (5th Cir. 1993)
League of United Latin American Citizens, Council No. 4434 v. Clements (5th Cir. 1993)
Black Voters v. McDonough (District Court, D. Massachusetts 1976)
Columbia Plaza Limited Partnership v. Cowles (District Court, District of Columbia 1975)
Henderson v. Perry (District Court, E.D. Texas 2005)
City of Port Arthur, Tex. v. United States (District Court, District of Columbia 1981)
Associated General Contractors v. Secretary of Commerce of the United States Department of Commerce (United States District Court for the Central District of California 1978)
Latasha Holloway v. City of Virginia Beach (4th Cir. 2022)
Latasha Holloway v. City of Virginia Beach (4th Cir. 2022)

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.

We are informed that the State of Texas has adopted new apportionment legislation providing single-member districts to replace the multimember districts which are at issue before us in this case. That statute by its terms does not become effective until the 1976 elections, and intervening special elections to fill vacancies, if any, will be held in the districts involved as constituted on January 1, 1975. Rather than render an unnecessary judg *936 ment on the validity of the constitutional views expressed by the District Court in this case, which we do not undertake to do at this time, we vacate the judgment of the District Court and remand the case to that court for reconsideration in light of the recent Texas reapportionment legislation and for dismissal if the case is or becomes moot.

So ordered.

Mr. Justice Douglas took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

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