HURD ET AL.

v.

HODGE ET AL.; AND URCIOLO ET AL. V. HODGE ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Jones et ux. v. Alfred H. Mayer Co., 392 U.S. 409 (U.S. 1968)
  …ons that would have been covered by a decision in this Court sustaining the petitioner’s claim on the merits. The coverage of § 1982, however, is markedly different from that of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. 82 U. S. App. D. C. 180, 162 F. 2d 233. 332 U. S. 789. Compare Harmon v. Tyler, 273 U. S. 668, invalidating a New Orleans ordinance which gave legal force to private discrimination by forbidding any Negro to establish a home in a white community, or any white person to establish a home in a Negro comm…
• Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763 (U.S. 1950)
  …ion cases, covering at least 80 persons, 336 U. S. 964; In re Felsch, 337 U. S. 953; In re Buerger, 338 U. S. 884; In re Hans, 339 U. S. 976; In re Schmidt, 339 U. S. 976; Lammers v. United States, 339 U. S. 976. And see also Milch v. United States, 332 U. S. 789. These cases and the variety of questions they raised are analyzed and discussed by Fairman, Some New Problems of the Constitution Following the Flag, 1 Stanford L. Rev. 587. “. . . In the primary meaning of the words, an alien friend is the subje…
• Hirota v. MacArthur, 335 U.S. 876 (U.S. 1948)
  …r intervention from one who has been so identified with controversial phases of war crimes law that he cannot expect others to consider him as detached and dispassionate on the subject as he thinks himself to be. See, e. g., Milch v. United States, 332 U. S. 789; Brandt v. United States, 333 U. S. 836; Brack v. United States, 333 U. S. 836; Gebhardt v. United States, 333 U. S. 836; Hoven v. United States, 333 U. S. 836; Mrugowsky v. United States, 333 U. S. 836; Sievers v. United States, 333 U. S. 836; Fisc…