Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
THOMAS v. VIRGINIA, 1960 — 364 U.S. 443 · caselaw · US
Constitutional Law · MBE-tested
THOMAS v. VIRGINIA
364 U.S. 4435 L. Ed. 2d 192·Supreme Court of the United States·1960
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
THOMAS v. VIRGINIA.
No. 43.
Argued November 10, 1960.
Decided November 21, 1960.
Cornelius H. Doherty argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioner.
R. D. Mcllwaine III, Assistant Attorney General of Virginia, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the briefs were A. S. Harrison, Jr., Attorney General, and John W. Knowles, Assistant Attorney General.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The judgment of the Circuit Court of Arlington County of the Commonwealth of Virginia is reversed and the case is remanded to that court. Blodgett v. Silberman, 277 U. S. 1, 18.
Mr. Justice Black dissents for the same reason expressed by Mr. Justice Holmes in Union Transit Co. v. Kentucky, 199 U. S. 194, 211:
“It seems to me that the result reached by the Court probably is a desirable one, but I hardly understand how it can be deduced from the Fourteenth Amendment . . . .”