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.
Securities
Bartley et al. v. Richardson, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, et al.
404 U.S. 980·Supreme Court of the United States·1971
Mr. Justice Douglas dissents on basis of his dissent in Richardson v. Belcher, ante, p. 78, at 84.
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
December 7, 1971
No. 70-12.
Bartley et al. v. Richardson, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, et al.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal from D. C. E. D. Ky. Judgment holding constitutional § 224 of the Social Security Act, 42 U. S- C. § 424a, affirmed.
Mr. Justice Douglas dissents on basis of his dissent in Richardson v. Belcher, ante, p. 78, at 84.