General
LICHTEN et al. v. TEXAS
393 U.S. 86·Supreme Court of the United States·1968
Mr. Justice Harlan is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and the case set for argument.
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
LICHTEN et al. v. TEXAS.
No. 414.
Decided October 28, 1968.
Chris Dixie for appellants.
Crawford C. Martin, Attorney General of Texas, Nola White, First Assistant Attorney General, A. J. Ca-rubbi, Jr., Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Hawthorne Phillips, Gilbert J. Pena, and Alio B. Crow, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Mr. Justice Harlan is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and the case set for argument.