From our private database of 37,200+ case briefs...
Clements v. Fashing
United States Supreme Court
457 U.S. 957 (1982)
Facts
Fashing, Baca, McGhee, and Ybarra (plaintiffs) were public officials in Texas. Fashing was a county judge, Baca and McGhee were justices of the peace, and Ybarra was a constable. Each of them wanted to run for a higher public office, but none could announce their candidacies because of Article XVI, §65 of the Texas Constitution, which triggered the automatic resignation of any public official who announced his candidacy for another public office. Baca specifically alleged that he could not run for the legislature because Article III, §19 of the Texas Constitution required officeholders to complete their current terms before becoming eligible to serve in the legislature. The District Court for the Western District of Texas found that both sections violated the officials’ equal protection rights. The court of appeals reversed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rehnquist, J.)
Concurrence (Stevens, J.)
Dissent (Brennan, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 629,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 37,200 briefs, keyed to 984 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.