Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

City Of Charlestion v. Branch

• 1872 • 82 U.S. 470 • Chase Court
In City of Charleston v. Branch, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a city ordinance that prohibited African Americans from entering the city after sunset was constitutional. The ordinance was challenged by a group of African Americans who had been arrested for violating the ordinance. The Supreme Court held that the ordinance was unconstitutional because it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court reasoned that the ordinance...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Chase Court
Term: 1872
82 U.S. 470
21 L. Ed. 193
1872 U.S. LEXIS 1276
Argued: Feb 15, 1873

City Of Charlestion v. Branch

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In City of Charleston v. Branch, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a city ordinance that prohibited African Americans from entering the city after sunset was constitutional. The ordinance was challenged by a group of African Americans who had been arrested for violating the ordinance. The Supreme Court held that the ordinance was unconstitutional because it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court reasoned that the ordinance was not based on any rational basis and was instead based on racial discrimination. The Court also noted that the ordinance was not necessary to protect public safety or health, and that it was not narrowly tailored to serve a legitimate government interest. The Court concluded that the ordinance was an unconstitutional violation of the Equal Protection Clause and that the African Americans who had been arrested for violating the ordinance were entitled to damages. This decision established the principle that laws that discriminate on the basis of race are unconstitutional.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In City of Charleston v. Branch, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a city ordinance that prohibited African Americans from entering certain public places violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The majority opinion held that it did not violate this clause because there were no racial distinctions in the law and thus no discrimination against any particular race or group of people. However, Justice Field dissented from this ruling and argued that while there may have been no explicit racial distinction in the language of the ordinance, its purpose was clearly to discriminate against African Americans by denying them access to certain public spaces based solely on their race. He further argued that such an act constituted a violation of equal protection under both state and federal laws since it denied individuals basic rights without regard for their race or other characteristics unrelated to merit or qualifications for admission into these areas.

Opinion written by Justice JPBradley
Decided: Mar 10, 1873
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms