Oregon v. Mitchell

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Template:Use mdy dates

Template:Use American English

Template:Infobox SCOTUS case Oregon v. Mitchell, {{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if: 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|{{{name}}}]], 
    |{{#ifexist:{{{name}}}
      |{{#ifeq:{{{name}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |{{{name}}}
        |[[{{{name}}}]]
      }}
    |{{{name}}}
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:yes|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:yes|no
   |112{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}}}
     |o = 112{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}}}
     |w = 112{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if: 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|{{{name}}}]], 
    |{{{name}}}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:
 |at {{{pin}}}
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}, was a U.S. Supreme Court case in which the states of Oregon, Texas, Arizona, and Idaho challenged the constitutionality of Sections 201, 202, and 302 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) Amendments of 1970 passed by the 91st United States Congress, and where John Mitchell was the respondent in his role as United States Attorney General.<ref name="Oregon v. Mitchell p. 112">{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Oregon v. Mitchell
      |{{#ifeq:Oregon v. Mitchell|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
      }}
    |Oregon v. Mitchell
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |112{{#if:112|, 112|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:112|, 112}}
     |o = 112{{#if:112|, 112}}
     |w = 112{{#if:112|, 112}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:112|, 112}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |Oregon v. Mitchell, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:112
 |at 112
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref> The Supreme Court ruled that the literacy test ban under Section 201, the minimum residency duration requirement for voter registration and the uniform rule for absentee voting in presidential elections under Section 202, and that Congress lowering the voting age in federal elections from 21 to 18 under Section 302 were all constitutional, but that Congress lowering the voting age in state and local elections from 21 to 18 under Section 302 was unconstitutional.<ref name="Oregon v. Mitchell p. 112" />

Holdings

Section 201

Despite the Court upholding Section 201 unanimously, Potter Stewart, Warren Burger, and Harry Blackmun in a single opinion,<ref>{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Oregon v. Mitchell
      |{{#ifeq:Oregon v. Mitchell|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
      }}
    |Oregon v. Mitchell
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |112{{#if:282–284|, 282–284|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:282–284|, 282–284}}
     |o = 112{{#if:282–284|, 282–284}}
     |w = 112{{#if:282–284|, 282–284}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:282–284|, 282–284}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |Oregon v. Mitchell, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:282–284
 |at 282–284
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref> William J. Brennan, Byron White, and Thurgood Marshall in a separate single opinion,<ref>{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Oregon v. Mitchell
      |{{#ifeq:Oregon v. Mitchell|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
      }}
    |Oregon v. Mitchell
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |112{{#if:231–236|, 231–236|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:231–236|, 231–236}}
     |o = 112{{#if:231–236|, 231–236}}
     |w = 112{{#if:231–236|, 231–236}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:231–236|, 231–236}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |Oregon v. Mitchell, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:231–236
 |at 231–236
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref> and John Marshall Harlan II in a separate opinion argued the literacy test ban was constitutional under Section 2 of the 15th Amendment.<ref>{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Oregon v. Mitchell
      |{{#ifeq:Oregon v. Mitchell|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
      }}
    |Oregon v. Mitchell
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |112{{#if:216–217|, 216–217|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:216–217|, 216–217}}
     |o = 112{{#if:216–217|, 216–217}}
     |w = 112{{#if:216–217|, 216–217}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:216–217|, 216–217}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |Oregon v. Mitchell, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:216–217
 |at 216–217
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref> In separate opinions, William O. Douglas argued that it was constitutional under Section 5 of the 14th Amendment to enforce the Equal Protection Clause,<ref>{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Oregon v. Mitchell
      |{{#ifeq:Oregon v. Mitchell|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
      }}
    |Oregon v. Mitchell
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |112{{#if:144–147|, 144–147|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:144–147|, 144–147}}
     |o = 112{{#if:144–147|, 144–147}}
     |w = 112{{#if:144–147|, 144–147}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:144–147|, 144–147}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |Oregon v. Mitchell, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:144–147
 |at 144–147
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref> while Hugo Black argued that it was constitutional under both Section 2 of the 15th Amendment and Section 5 of the 14th Amendment to enforce the Equal Protection Clause.<ref name="Oregon v. Mitchell p. 118">{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Oregon v. Mitchell
      |{{#ifeq:Oregon v. Mitchell|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
      }}
    |Oregon v. Mitchell
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |112{{#if:118|, 118|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:118|, 118}}
     |o = 112{{#if:118|, 118}}
     |w = 112{{#if:118|, 118}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:118|, 118}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |Oregon v. Mitchell, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:118
 |at 118
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref><ref>{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Oregon v. Mitchell
      |{{#ifeq:Oregon v. Mitchell|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
      }}
    |Oregon v. Mitchell
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |112{{#if:131–134|, 131–134|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:131–134|, 131–134}}
     |o = 112{{#if:131–134|, 131–134}}
     |w = 112{{#if:131–134|, 131–134}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:131–134|, 131–134}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |Oregon v. Mitchell, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:131–134
 |at 131–134
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref>

Section 202

The Court upheld Section 202 by an 8–1 ruling with Douglas and Brennan, White, and Marshall arguing the minimum residency duration requirement for voter registration and the uniform rule for absentee voting in presidential elections was constitutional under Section 5 of the 14th Amendment to enforce the Privileges or Immunities Clause.<ref>{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Oregon v. Mitchell
      |{{#ifeq:Oregon v. Mitchell|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
      }}
    |Oregon v. Mitchell
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |112{{#if:147–150|, 147–150|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:147–150|, 147–150}}
     |o = 112{{#if:147–150|, 147–150}}
     |w = 112{{#if:147–150|, 147–150}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:147–150|, 147–150}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |Oregon v. Mitchell, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:147–150
 |at 147–150
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref><ref>{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Oregon v. Mitchell
      |{{#ifeq:Oregon v. Mitchell|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
      }}
    |Oregon v. Mitchell
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |112{{#if:236–239|, 236–239|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:236–239|, 236–239}}
     |o = 112{{#if:236–239|, 236–239}}
     |w = 112{{#if:236–239|, 236–239}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:236–239|, 236–239}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |Oregon v. Mitchell, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:236–239
 |at 236–239
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref> Stewart, Burger, and Blackmun also argued Section 202 was constitutional under Section 5 of the 14th Amendment to enforce the Privileges or Immunities Clause but more broadly under the Necessary and Proper Clause of Article I, Section VIII to protect constitutional provisions related to freedom of movement in general and under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV, Section II specifically.<ref>{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Oregon v. Mitchell
      |{{#ifeq:Oregon v. Mitchell|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
      }}
    |Oregon v. Mitchell
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |112{{#if:285–292|, 285–292|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:285–292|, 285–292}}
     |o = 112{{#if:285–292|, 285–292}}
     |w = 112{{#if:285–292|, 285–292}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:285–292|, 285–292}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |Oregon v. Mitchell, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:285–292
 |at 285–292
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref> Black argued Section 202 was constitutional under the Congressional Elections Clause of Article I, Section IV and the Necessary and Proper Clause.<ref name="Oregon v. Mitchell p. 118" /><ref>{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Oregon v. Mitchell
      |{{#ifeq:Oregon v. Mitchell|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
      }}
    |Oregon v. Mitchell
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |112{{#if:134|, 134|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:134|, 134}}
     |o = 112{{#if:134|, 134}}
     |w = 112{{#if:134|, 134}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:134|, 134}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |Oregon v. Mitchell, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:134
 |at 134
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref> Harlan dissented and argued Section 202 was unconstitutional under the 10th Amendment by the delegation of powers under the Presidential Electors Clause and the Electoral College Meetings Clause of Article II, Section I.<ref name="Oregon v. Mitchell pp. 154–213">{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Oregon v. Mitchell
      |{{#ifeq:Oregon v. Mitchell|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
      }}
    |Oregon v. Mitchell
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |112{{#if:154–213|, 154–213|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:154–213|, 154–213}}
     |o = 112{{#if:154–213|, 154–213}}
     |w = 112{{#if:154–213|, 154–213}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:154–213|, 154–213}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |Oregon v. Mitchell, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:154–213
 |at 154–213
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref>

Section 302

The Court upheld Section 302 lowering the voting age in federal elections by a 5–4 ruling with Douglas and Brennan, White, and Marshall arguing it was constitutional under Section 5 of the 14th Amendment to enforce the Equal Protection Clause,<ref name="Oregon v. Mitchell pp. 135–144">{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Oregon v. Mitchell
      |{{#ifeq:Oregon v. Mitchell|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
      }}
    |Oregon v. Mitchell
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |112{{#if:135–144|, 135–144|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:135–144|, 135–144}}
     |o = 112{{#if:135–144|, 135–144}}
     |w = 112{{#if:135–144|, 135–144}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:135–144|, 135–144}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |Oregon v. Mitchell, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:135–144
 |at 135–144
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref><ref name="Oregon v. Mitchell pp. 239–281">{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Oregon v. Mitchell
      |{{#ifeq:Oregon v. Mitchell|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
      }}
    |Oregon v. Mitchell
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |112{{#if:239–281|, 239–281|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:239–281|, 239–281}}
     |o = 112{{#if:239–281|, 239–281}}
     |w = 112{{#if:239–281|, 239–281}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:239–281|, 239–281}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |Oregon v. Mitchell, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:239–281
 |at 239–281
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref> and Black arguing it was constitutional under the Congressional Elections Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause.<ref>{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Oregon v. Mitchell
      |{{#ifeq:Oregon v. Mitchell|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
      }}
    |Oregon v. Mitchell
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |112{{#if:117|, 117|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:117|, 117}}
     |o = 112{{#if:117|, 117}}
     |w = 112{{#if:117|, 117}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:117|, 117}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |Oregon v. Mitchell, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:117
 |at 117
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref><ref>{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Oregon v. Mitchell
      |{{#ifeq:Oregon v. Mitchell|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
      }}
    |Oregon v. Mitchell
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |112{{#if:119–124|, 119–124|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:119–124|, 119–124}}
     |o = 112{{#if:119–124|, 119–124}}
     |w = 112{{#if:119–124|, 119–124}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:119–124|, 119–124}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |Oregon v. Mitchell, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:119–124
 |at 119–124
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref> Harlan and Stewart, Burger, and Blackmun dissented and argued that Section 302 as applied to federal elections was unconstitutional under the 10th Amendment by the delegation of powers under the House Electors Qualifications Clause of Article I, Section II, the Congressional Elections Clause, the 17th Amendment, and the Presidential Electors Clause and the Electoral College Meetings Clause of Article II, Section I.<ref name="Oregon v. Mitchell pp. 154–213" /><ref name="Oregon v. Mitchell pp. 293–296">{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Oregon v. Mitchell
      |{{#ifeq:Oregon v. Mitchell|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
      }}
    |Oregon v. Mitchell
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |112{{#if:293–296|, 293–296|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:293–296|, 293–296}}
     |o = 112{{#if:293–296|, 293–296}}
     |w = 112{{#if:293–296|, 293–296}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:293–296|, 293–296}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |Oregon v. Mitchell, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:293–296
 |at 293–296
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref> In a separate 5–4 ruling where Black joined Harlan and Stewart, Burger, and Blackmun to form the majority, the Court held that Section 302 lowering the voting age in state and local elections was unconstitutional under the 10th Amendment by the delegation of powers under the House Electors Qualifications Clause and the 17th Amendment,<ref name="Oregon v. Mitchell p. 118" /><ref>{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Oregon v. Mitchell
      |{{#ifeq:Oregon v. Mitchell|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Oregon v. Mitchell
      }}
    |Oregon v. Mitchell
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:112 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |112{{#if:124–131|, 124–131|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 112{{#if:124–131|, 124–131}}
     |o = 112{{#if:124–131|, 124–131}}
     |w = 112{{#if:124–131|, 124–131}}
     |#default = 112{{#if:124–131|, 124–131}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1970| (1970) }} |{{#if:Oregon v. Mitchell 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell]], 
    |Oregon v. Mitchell, 
  }}

}}{{#if:400 

 |400 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:124–131
 |at 124–131
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref><ref name="Oregon v. Mitchell pp. 154–213" /><ref name="Oregon v. Mitchell pp. 293–296" /> while Douglas and Brennan, White, and Marshall argued it was also constitutional under Section 5 of the 14th Amendment to enforce the Equal Protection Clause.<ref name="Oregon v. Mitchell pp. 135–144" /><ref name="Oregon v. Mitchell pp. 239–281" />

26th Amendment

Less than seven months after Oregon v. Mitchell was decided, the Court's Section 302 holdings with respect to minimum age requirements as voter qualifications were superseded by the ratification of the 26th Amendment.<ref name=CUSA>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref>

Subsequent cases

In Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. (2013), the Court concluded that the Section 302 holding that permitted Congress to preempt state voter qualifications for minimum voting age in federal elections under the Equal Protection Clause was of minimal precedential value to that decision.<ref>{{#ifeq:no|no |{{#if:Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc. 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc.]], 
    |{{#ifexist:Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc.
      |{{#ifeq:Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc.|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc.
        |Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc.
      }}
    |Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc.
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:570 

 |570
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:1 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |1{{#if:13–15|, 13–15|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 1{{#if:13–15|, 13–15}}
     |o = 1{{#if:13–15|, 13–15}}
     |w = 1{{#if:13–15|, 13–15}}
     |#default = 1{{#if:13–15|, 13–15}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:2013| (2013) }} |{{#if:Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc. 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc.]], 
    |Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Ariz., Inc., 
  }}

}}{{#if:570 

 |570 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:13–15
 |at 13–15
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}</ref>

See also

|{{#if: 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|{{{name}}}]], 
    |{{#ifexist:{{{name}}}
      |{{#ifeq:{{{name}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |{{{name}}}
        |[[{{{name}}}]]
      }}
    |{{{name}}}
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:297 

 |297
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:1 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |1{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 1{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}}}
     |o = 1{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}}}
     |w = 1{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}}}
     |#default = 1{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1936| (1936) }} |{{#if: 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|{{{name}}}]], 
    |{{{name}}}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:297 

 |297 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:
 |at {{{pin}}}
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}

|{{#if: 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|{{{name}}}]], 
    |{{#ifexist:{{{name}}}
      |{{#ifeq:{{{name}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |{{{name}}}
        |[[{{{name}}}]]
      }}
    |{{{name}}}
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:298 

 |298
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:238 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |238{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 238{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}}}
     |o = 238{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}}}
     |w = 238{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}}}
     |#default = 238{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1936| (1936) }} |{{#if: 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|{{{name}}}]], 
    |{{{name}}}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:298 

 |298 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:
 |at {{{pin}}}
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}

|{{#if: 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|{{{name}}}]], 
    |{{#ifexist:{{{name}}}
      |{{#ifeq:{{{name}}}|Oregon v. Mitchell
        |{{{name}}}
        |[[{{{name}}}]]
      }}
    |{{{name}}}
    }}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:|No. {{#ifeq:|no 

 |{{{docket}}}, 
 |{{#switch:{{{source}}}
   |f = {{{docket}}}
   |#default = {{{docket}}}
   }}, 
 }}

}}{{#if:430 

 |430
 |___

}} {{#ifeq:|no 

   |US
   |U.S.

}} {{#if:|({{{5}}} {{{4}}}) }}{{#if:188 

 |{{#ifeq:|no
   |188{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}|}}
   |{{#switch:
     |f = 188{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}}}
     |o = 188{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}}}
     |w = 188{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}}}
     |#default = 188{{#if:|, {{{pin}}}}}
   }}
 }} 
 |___

}}{{#if: 

 |, slip op. at {{{slip}}}

}}{{#if:1977| (1977) }} |{{#if: 

 |{{#if:
    |[[{{{link}}}|{{{name}}}]], 
    |{{{name}}}, 
  }}

}}{{#if:430 

 |430 {{#ifeq:|no
   |US 
   |U.S. 
 }}
 |}}{{#if:
 |at {{{pin}}}
 |{{#if:
   |slip op. at {{{slip}}}
   |at ___
 }}

}} }}{{#if: 

 | ({{{dissenter}}}, {{#if:
   |{{{dissent-type}}}
   |dissenting
 }})
 |{{#if:
   | ({{{concurrer}}}, {{#if:
     |{{{concurrence-type}}}
     |concurring
   }})
 }}

}}

References

Template:Reflist

Further reading

Template:US10thAmendment Template:US14thAmendment

Retrieved from "https://wiki.sarg.dev/index.php?title=Oregon_v._Mitchell&oldid=597547"