TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Henry J. Kirksey v. City of Jackson, Mississippi

Henry J. KIRKSEY, Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CITY OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI, Et Al., Respondents-Appellees

Kirksey v. City of Jackson, 669 F.2d 316 (5th Cir. 1982)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
March 5, 1982
Docket
No. 81-4058
Judges
Gee, Markey, Per Curiam, Politz
Citations
669 F.2d 3161982 U.S. App. LEXIS 21217
Disposition
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

In their application for rehearing, appellants challenge our decision on the question of judicial inquiry into the motivation of the voters in the referendum election. Our opinion, 663 F.2d 659 (5th Cir. 1981), holds that an individual voter may not be subjected to judicial examination concerning how he voted or why he personally voted in that fashion. We affirm that conclusion. However, we specially note that our decision is not to be misunderstood as holding or suggesting that, in a proper case, the motivation of the electorate may not be examined by the introduction of *317 either direct or circumstantial evidence. The latter inquiry may be a proper inquiry. The referendum process may not be used to legitimate an unconstitutional act.

See Hunter v. Erickson, 393 U.S. 385 , 89 S.Ct. 557 , 21 L.Ed.2d 616 (1969);

Reitman v. Mulkey, 387 U.S. 369 , 87 S.Ct. 1627 , 18 L.Ed.2d 830 (1967);

Lucas v. Colorado General Assembly, 377 U.S. 713 , 84 S.Ct. 1459 , 12 L.Ed.2d 632 (1964). But the record in the case before us does not establish that type of abuse of the electoral process.

With this clarification, the application for rehearing is DENIED and no member of this panel nor Judge of this Administrative Unit in regular active service having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc (Rule 35, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Local Fifth Circuit Rule 16; Fifth Circuit Judicial Council Resolution of January 14, 1981), the suggestion for Rehearing En Banc is DENIED.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 11 cases

View all citing references →
1982: 31983: 11986: 31993: 31996: 119822026peak 1982 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. United States v. Dallas County Commission548 F. Supp. 794 (S.D. Ala. 1982)
  2. League of United Latin American Citizens, Council No. 4434 v. Clements999 F.2d 831 (5th Cir. 1993)
  3. Arthur v. City of Toledo782 F.2d 565 (6th Cir. 1986)
  4. Henry J. Kirksey v. City of Jackson, Mississippi714 F.2d 42 (5th Cir. 1983)
  5. Johnson v. Mortham926 F. Supp. 1460 (N.D. Fla. 1996)
  6. League of United Latin American Citizens, Council No. 4434 v. Clements986 F.2d 728 (5th Cir. 1993)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
Reitman v. Mulkey, 387 U.S. 369 (1967) 495
Lucas v. Forty-Fourth Gen. Assembly of Colo., 377 U.S. 713 (1964) 345
Hunter v. Erickson, 393 U.S. 385 (1969) 255
Kirksey v. City of Jackson, 663 F.2d 659 (5th Cir. 1981) 19

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list