New York City Transit Authority v. Beazer

440 U.S. 568 (1979)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
N
From our private database of 46,200+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

New York City Transit Authority v. Beazer

United States Supreme Court
440 U.S. 568 (1979)

Play video

Facts

The New York City Transit Authority (defendant) promulgated a policy that it would not hire or employ persons currently participating in one of New York City’s several methadone maintenance programs. About 40,000 persons received methadone treatments in New York, and treatments were primarily administered to treat the physical withdrawal symptoms of heroin addicts. Beazer (plaintiff) and three other persons brought suit in federal district court against the New York City Transit Authority in a class action on behalf of all persons who had been, or would in the future be, subject to discharge or rejection as employees of the Transit Authority because they participated in a methadone maintenance program. The district court ruled in favor of Beazer and found the employment policy unconstitutional. The decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Stevens, J.)

Concurrence/Dissent (Powell, J.)

Dissent (Brennan, J.)

Dissent (White, J.)

What to do next…

  1. 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 778,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. 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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 778,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 778,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,200 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Civil Rights
Constitutional Law
Employment Law

Key Terms