Digital Commons Network^™

07-01-1986 Per Curiam, William J. Brennan

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

These cases present several issues arising out of petitioners' action against respondents for alleged racial discrimination in employment and provision of services by the North Carolina Agricultural Extension Service (Extension Service). The District Court declined to certify various proposed classes and, after a lengthy trial, entered judgment for respondents in all respects, finding that petitioners had not carried their burden of demonstrating that respondents had engaged in a pattern or practice of racial discrimination. The District Court also ruled against each of the individual plaintiff 's discrimination claims. The Court of Appeals affirmed. 751 F. 2d 662 (CA4 1984).

07-01-1986 Justice Brennan, Concurring, William J. Brennan

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

JUSTICE BRENNAN for a unanimous Court, concurring in part.

06-30-1986 Correspondence From Blackmun To Brennan, Harry A. Blackmun

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

Dear Bill:

I, of course, join you per curiam.

06-30-1986 Justice Brennan, Dissenting, William J. Brennan

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

JUSTICE BRENNAN, with whom JUSTICE MARSHALL, JUSTICE BLACKMUN, and JUSTICE STEVENS join, dissenting in part.

06-30-1986 Justice Brennan, Per Curiam, William J. Brennan

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

These cases present several issues arising out of petitioners' action against respondents for alleged racial discrimination in employment and provision of services by the North Carolina Agricultural Extension Service (Extension Service). The District Court declined to certify various proposed classes and, after a lengthy trial, entered judgment for respondents in all respects, finding that petitioners had not carried their burden of demonstrating that respondents had engaged in a pattern or practice of racial discrimination. The District Court also ruled against each of the individual plaintiff 's discrimination claims. The Court of Appeals affirmed. 751 F. 2d 662 (CA4 1984). We …

06-28-1986 Justice White, Concurring, Byron R. White

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

JUSTICE WHITE, with whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE, JUSTICE POWELL, JUSTICE REHNQUIST, and JUSTICE O'CONNOR join, concurring.

06-27-1986 Correspondence From White To Brennan, Byron R. White

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

Dear Bill,

I join your per curiam opinion in this case. I am making a change or two in my concurrence.

06-27-1986 Clerk Memo, Unknown

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

I recommend you join the per curiam. I assume from the circulations that you're still counted as being with JUSTICE BRENNAN all the way .

06-27-1986 Justice Brennan, Per Curiam, William J. Brennan

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

These cases present several issues arising out of petitioners' action against respondents for alleged racial discrimination in employment and provision of services by the North Carolina Agricultural Extension Service (Extension Service). The District Court declined to certify various proposed classes and, after a lengthy trial, entered judgment for respondents in all respects, finding that petitioners had not carried their burden of demonstrating that respondents had engaged in a pattern or practice of racial discrimination. The District Court also ruled against each of the individual plaintiff's discrimination claims. The Court of Appeals affirmed. 751 F. 2d 662 (CA4 1984).

06-27-1986 Justice Brennan, Dissenting, William J. Brennan

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

JUSTICE BRENNAN, with whom JUSTICE MARSHALL, JUSTICE BLACKMUN, and JUSTICE STEVENS join, dissenting in part.

06-27-1986 Justice Brennan, Concurring, William J. Brennan

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

JUSTICE BRENNAN for a unanimous Court, concurring in part.

06-25-1986 Justice White, Concurring, Byron R. White

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

JUSTICE WHITE, with whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE, JUSTICE POWELL, JUSTICE REHNQUIST, and JUSTICE O'CONNOR join, concurring.

06-18-1986 Correspondence From Burger To White, Warren E. Burger

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

Dear Byron:

I join your June 17 draft.

06-17-1986 Justice White, Concurring And Dissenting, Byron R. White

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

JUSTICE WHITE, with whom JUSTICE POWELL. JUSTICE REHNQUIST, and JUSTICE O'CONNOR join. concurring in part and dissenting in part.

06-16-1986 Correspondence From Rehnquist To White, William H. Rehnquist

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

Dear Byron,

Please join me in your opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part .

06-16-1986 Correspondence From O'Connor To White, Sandra Day O'Connor

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

Dear Byron,

Please join me in your opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.

06-09-1986 Clerk Memo, Unknown

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

I think JUSTICE BRENNAN's opinion is very good and I recommend that you join it. It reflects your vote at conference.

04-25-1986 Notes From Oral Argument, Harry A. Blackmun

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

Harry A. Blackmun's handwritten notes from oral argument.

04-24-1986 Clerk Memo, Unknown

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

There may be an easy way to avoid deciding the merits of the difficult 4H club and homemaker club issue . The DC considered the Agriculture Regulation that states:

In administering a program regarding which the recipient has previously discriminated against persons on the ground of race, color, or national origin, the recipient must take affirmative action to overcome the effects of prior discrimination.

7 CFR 15.3(b)(6)(i). The DC stated that the regulation was not violated because it required a prerequisite that an action be taken on the ground of race. In the bench memo I indicated that the prerequisite …

04-20-1986 Notes From Oral Argument, Harry A. Blackmun

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

Harry A. Blackmun's notes from oral argument.

05-12-1986 Notes From Oral Argument, Harry A. Blackmun

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

Harry A. Blackmun's handwritten notes from oral argument.

10-30-1985 Preliminary Memorandum, Karl S. Coplan

Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)

SUMMARY: Petrs challenge rulings by the dc, affirmed by CA4 1) that differentials between wages paid to white and black employees of the North Carolina Agricultural Extension Service (NCAES) did not constitute employment discrimination; 2) that maintenance of local 4-H clubs that are voluntarily segregated does not violate the Title VI prohibition against discrimination in programs receiving federal aid; and 3) that the NCAES did not discriminate against blacks in selecting county extension chairmen.