Attorney General of New York v. Soto-Lopez
United States Supreme Court
476 U.S. 898 (1986)
The state of New York, through its Constitution and civil service laws, afforded a preference in civil service employment to veterans who were residents of the state at the time they entered military service. Soto-Lopez was one of two applicants for civil service employment who sued the city of New York in federal court on claims that the preferential residency requirement violated constitutional right to travel and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The district court dismissed Soto-Lopez’ complaint. The court of appeal reversed and held the residency requirement unconstitutional. The state of New York (defendant) petitioned the United States Supreme Court for review.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Brennan, J.)
Concurrence (Burger, J.)
Concurrence (White, J.)
Dissent (O’Connor, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 159,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,700 briefs, keyed to 186 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.