BHANDARI
v.
FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF COMMERCE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Supreme Court denied certiorari in a case where the Fifth Circuit held that 42 U.S.C. §1981 does not prohibit private alienage discrimination in contract formation, despite the Court's prior holdings in Patterson v. McLean Credit Union and Runyon v. McCrary that §1981 covers private racial discrimination. Justice White, dissenting from the denial of certiorari, argued that the Court should grant review to clarify whether §1981's prohibition on private discrimination extends to alienage as well as race.
[1] 42 U.S.C. …
[2] 42 U.S.C. …
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Justice White,
with whom Justice O’Connor joins, dissenting.
This petition presents the issue whether 42 U. S. C. §1981 (1982 ed.) prohibits alienage discrimination in the making of private contracts. When first considering this case, the Fifth Circuit in banc held that § 1981 does not have this effect. Bhandari v. First National Bank of Commerce, 829 F. 2d 1343 (1987). Petitioner sought review here. We granted the petition, vacated the Fifth Circuit’s judgment, and remanded the case so that the Court of Appeals might reconsider its holding in light of our decision in Patterson v. McLean Credit Union, 491 U. S. 164 (1989). See 492 U. S. 901 (1989). Reaffirming Runyon v. McCrary, 427 U. S. 160 (1976), we held in Patterson that § 1981 covers acts of private discrimination. On remand, the Fifth Circuit declined to alter its original holding. The in banc court reasoned that Patterson was inapposite because that case concerned private racial discrimination whereas this case involves private alienage discrimination. 887 F. 2d 609 (1989).
I would grant the petition because it is not clear to me that § 1981 should be construed to prohibit private, as well as official, discrimination on the basis of race, but to prohibit only governmental discrimination on the basis of alienage. Prior cases, see Graham v. Richardson, 403 U. S. 365, 377 (1971), and Takahashi v. Fish and Game Comm’n, 334 U. S. 410, 419 (1948), have indicated that §1981 prohibits official discrimination against aliens. In Runyon, we held that §1981 extends to private conduct, a holding reaffirmed in Patterson. Certiorari should be granted to settle whether §1981 proscribes private alienage discrimination.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Parke v. Raley, 506 U.S. 20 (U.S. 1992)…of Appeals. Raley v. Parke, Civ. Action No. C89-0756-L(A) (WD Ky., Mar. 15, 1990). The Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, however, agreed with respondent, relying on its recent decision in Dunn v. Simmons, 877 F. 2d 1275 (1989), cert. denied, 494 U. S. 1061 (1990). 945 F. 2d 137 (1991). Simmons held that when no transcript of the prior guilty plea proceeding exists, the prosecution has the entire burden of establishing the plea’s validity, and no presumption of regularity attaches to the final judgme…
-
United States v. De la Jara, 973 F.2d 746 (9th Cir. 1992)…n might not even constitute an equivocal invocation, and thus might require no clarification by the interrogating officers. In Norman v. Ducharme, 871 F. 2d 1483 (9th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1031, 110 S.Ct. 1483, 108 L.Ed.2d 619 (1990) and 494 U.S. 1061, 110 [*751] S.Ct. 1538, 108 L.Ed.2d 777 (1990), for example, we observed that when the defendant asked a police officer “whether he should get an attorney,” the question “did not rise to the level of an equivocal request for counsel.” Id. at 1484, 1…
-
Britt v. The Grocers Supply Co., Inc., 978 F.2d 1441 (5th Cir. 1992)…(5th Cir.1974), overruled on other grounds by Bhandari v. First Nat'l Bank of Commerce, 829 F. 2d 1343 (5th Cir. 1987), vacated, 492 U.S. 901, 109 S.Ct. 3207, 106 L.Ed.2d 558 (1989), reinstated on remand, 887 F. 2d 609 (5th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1061, 110 S.Ct. 1539, 108 L.Ed.2d 778 (1990). The Guerra panel noted that [T]hough Title VII and the NLRA may overlap in the area of employment discrimination, their confluence must not be exaggerated..,. [A] plaintiff does not lose his right to an adju…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Patterson v. McLean Credit Union, 491 U.S. 164 (U.S. 1989)
- Runyon et ux. v. McCrary, 427 U.S. 160 (U.S. 1976)
- Takahashi v. Fish & Game Comm'n, 334 U.S. 410 (U.S. 1948)
- Jeetendra Bhandari v. First Nat'l Bank OF Commerce, 829 F.2d 1343 (5th Cir. 1987)
- Jeetendra Bhandari v. First Nat'l Bank OF Commerce, 887 F.2d 609 (5th Cir. 1989)
- O'Connell & Kittrell v. Kingery, 492 U.S. 901 (U.S. 1989)
- Railway Labor Executives' Assn. v. Chicago & N. W. Transp. Co., 492 U.S. 901 (U.S. 1989)