Johnson v. California
United States Supreme Court
543 U.S. 499 (2005)
The California Department of Corrections (defendant) had an unwritten policy of racially segregating prisoners in double cells in reception centers for up to sixty days each time they entered a new correctional facility. Prison administrators claimed the policy was targeted towards preventing violence among racial gangs. Johnson (plaintiff) was a prisoner in a California facility that challenged the policy in federal district court on the grounds that it violated the Equal Protection Clause. The district court granted summary judgment for California, and the court of appeals affirmed after applying a deferential standard of review to the policy rather than strict scrutiny. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (O’Connor, J.)
Concurrence (Ginsburg, J.)
Dissent (Thomas, J.)
Dissent (Stevens, 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 177,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.