144 Cited authorities

  1. Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Services

    436 U.S. 658 (1978)   Cited 67,456 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "local government . . . are 'persons'" for purposes of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  2. Will v. Michigan Dept. of State Police

    491 U.S. 58 (1989)   Cited 24,293 times
    Holding that official capacity state officer suits for prospective injunctive relief are suits against a "person" under § 1983 even though a "State" is not a "person" under that statute
  3. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green

    411 U.S. 792 (1973)   Cited 52,332 times   95 Legal Analyses
    Holding in employment discrimination case that statistical evidence of employer's general policy and practice may be relevant circumstantial evidence of discriminatory intent behind individual employment decision
  4. Pembaur v. Cincinnati

    475 U.S. 469 (1986)   Cited 9,187 times
    Holding that a county prosecutor's order to forcibly enter the plaintiff's clinic was a "municipal policy"
  5. Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. Florida

    517 U.S. 44 (1996)   Cited 5,097 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Congress cannot abrogate state-sovereign immunity under its Article I commerce power, and rejecting the result in Pennsylvania v. Union Gas Co. , 491 U.S. 1, 109 S.Ct. 2273, 105 L.Ed.2d 1, seven years later; the decision in Union Gas never garnered a majority
  6. Rizzo v. Goode

    423 U.S. 362 (1976)   Cited 13,354 times
    Holding that plaintiffs lacked standing to obtain injunctive relief against senior police officials to impose tighter police discipline to prevent harm to civilians
  7. Warth v. Seldin

    422 U.S. 490 (1975)   Cited 11,916 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Article III requires plaintiffs "to establish that, in fact, the asserted injury was the consequence of the defendants' actions"
  8. City of Boerne v. Flores

    521 U.S. 507 (1997)   Cited 1,803 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that RFRA is unconstitutional in so far as it permits suits against state actors
  9. Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Corp.

    429 U.S. 252 (1977)   Cited 4,300 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiffs need show only that "a discriminatory purpose has been a motivating factor in the decision," because, after all, "[r]arely can it be said that a legislature or administrative body operating under a broad mandate made a decision motivated solely by a single concern, or even that a particular purpose was the ‘dominant’ or ‘primary’ one."
  10. McMillian v. Monroe County

    520 U.S. 781 (1997)   Cited 1,391 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that even though "the sheriff's jurisdiction is limited to the borders of his county," the sheriff was a state official
  11. Section 1981 - Equal rights under the law

    42 U.S.C. § 1981   Cited 38,012 times   245 Legal Analyses
    Granting equal rights to "make and enforce contracts" without regard to race
  12. Section 12101 - Findings and purpose

    42 U.S.C. § 12101   Cited 23,431 times   65 Legal Analyses
    Finding a pattern of " unnecessary discrimination and prejudice" that "costs the United States billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses resulting from dependency and nonproductivity"
  13. Section 3604 - Discrimination in the sale or rental of housing and other prohibited practices

    42 U.S.C. § 3604   Cited 4,098 times   64 Legal Analyses
    Requiring any "accommodation" in "rules, policies, practices, or services" to be "reasonable"
  14. Section 3601 - Declaration of policy

    42 U.S.C. § 3601   Cited 4,007 times   44 Legal Analyses
    Stating the FHA is intended to provide “fair housing throughout the United States”
  15. Section 1341 - Taxes by States

    28 U.S.C. § 1341   Cited 1,871 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting federal judicial restraints on the collection of state taxes
  16. Section 2000d-7 - Civil rights remedies equalization

    42 U.S.C. § 2000d-7   Cited 737 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Abrogating state immunity for claims brought under Rehabilitation Act, Title VI, and Title IX
  17. Section 3605 - Discrimination in residential real estate-related transactions

    42 U.S.C. § 3605   Cited 463 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Barring "discriminat[ion] against any person in making available such a [housing] transaction ... because of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin"
  18. Section 5301 - Congressional findings and declaration of purpose

    42 U.S.C. § 5301   Cited 222 times
    Noting that the primary objective of the CDBG program is "the development of viable urban communities, by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment and expanding economic opportunities, principally for persons of low and moderate income"
  19. Section 2000d-3 - Construction of provisions not to authorize administrative action with respect to employment practices except where primary objective of Federal financial assistance is to provide employment

    42 U.S.C. § 2000d-3   Cited 167 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting government agencies and departments from commencing action "with respect to any employment practice of any employer . . . except where a primary objective of the Federal financial assistance is to provide employment"
  20. Section 1687 - Interpretation of "program or activity"

    20 U.S.C. § 1687   Cited 132 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Defining "program or activity"
  21. Section 100.65 - Discrimination in terms, conditions and privileges and in services and facilities

    24 C.F.R. § 100.65   Cited 87 times
    Noting prohibited actions under the FHA include "[f]ailing or delaying maintenance or repairs of sale or rental dwellings because of race[]"
  22. Section 92.1 - Overview

    24 C.F.R. § 92.1   Cited 11 times

    This part implements the HOME Investment Partnerships Act (the HOME Investment Partnerships Program). In general, under the HOME Investment Partnerships Program, HUD allocates funds by formula among eligible State and local governments to strengthen public-private partnerships and to expand the supply of decent, safe, sanitary, and affordable housing, with primary attention to rental housing, for very low-income and low-income families. Generally, HOME funds must be matched by nonfederal resources