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.
Goldsboro Christian Schools, Inc. v. United States; and Bob Jones University v. United States, 1982 — 456 U.S. 922 · caselaw · US
General
Goldsboro Christian Schools, Inc. v. United States; and Bob Jones University v. United States
456 U.S. 922·Supreme Court of the United States·1982
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
No. 81-1.
No. 81-3.
Goldsboro Christian Schools, Inc. v. United States; and Bob Jones University v. United States.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 4th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 454 U. S. 892.] (1) Motion of National Association for the Advancement of Colored People et al. for leave to intervene as parties respondent and for leave to participate in oral argument denied. (2) Alternative request to file a brief as amici curiae granted. (3) Motion of Laurence H. Tribe et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted. (4) Motion of Agencies of the United Church of Christ for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted. (5) Motion of Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law et al. for leave to file a supplemental brief as amici curiae granted. (6) Motion of North Carolina Association of Black Lawyers for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted. (7) Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to file a brief on the merits out of time granted. (8) Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to file a motion for divided argument out of time granted. (9) Motion of petitioner in No. 81-3 for an order directing respondent to act with respect to respondent’s memorandum filed January 8, 1982, denied. (10) Motions of petitioners for summary reversal denied. (11) William T. Coleman, Jr., Esquire, of Washington, D. C., a member of the Bar of this Court, is invited to brief and argue these cases as amicus curiae in support of the judgments below.