Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

Johnson v. California

Docket No.: 03-636
Certiorari Granted: Mar 1 2004
Argued: November 2, 2004
Decided: February 23, 2005

Topics:

Equal Protection, Civil Rights, Desegregation, Crime Control Act, Desegregation, Due Process, Eighth Amendment, Equal Protection Clause, Fifth Amendment, First Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, Fourth Amendment, Second Amendment, antitrust, criminal procedure, habeas, immigration, judicial review, jury selection, murder, patent, privacy, qualified immunity, racial discrimination, racial segregation

PartyNames: Garrison S. Johnson v. California, et al.
Petitioner: Garrison S. Johnson
Respondent: California, et al.

Court Below: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Citation: 321 F3d 791
Supreme Court Docket

Garrison S. Johnson
v.
California, et al.
543 U.S. 499 (2005)
Question Presented:

1. Is a state's practice of routine racial segregation of state prisoners for at least a 60-day period subject to the same strict scrutiny generally applicable to all other challenges to intentional racial segregation, or is it excused from such scrutiny and subject only to the more relaxed review afforded under Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78 (1987)? 2. Does California's practice of routine racial segregation of state prisoners for at least a 60-day period violate the Equal Protection Clause?

Question:

Is a state's practice of temporary racial segregation of state prisoners subject to strict scrutiny?

Johnson v. California
ORAL ARGUMENT

November 2, 2004

Holding: reversed and remanded
Decision: Decision: 6 votes for Johnson, 2 vote(s) against
Vote: 5-3
Recused: Chief Justice Robert
Opinion By:
Database Connection failed: SQLSTATE[HY000] [1045] Access denied for user 'restauz8_sophi'@'localhost' (using password: YES)