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.
TURNER et al. v. CLAY et al., 1970 — 397 U.S. 39 · caselaw · US
General
TURNER et al. v. CLAY et al.
397 U.S. 39·Supreme Court of the United States·1970
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
TURNER et al. v. CLAY et al.
No. 982.
Decided February 24, 1970
Harry M. Lightsey, Jr., for appellants.
Huger Sinkler for Clay et al., and Daniel R. McLeod, Attorney General of South Carolina, and C. Tolbert Goolsby, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, for Thornton, Secretary of State of South Carolina, appellees.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The motions to dismiss are granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.