SHEPPARD

v.

EARLEY, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA

Citator

Cited By

• Reno v. Bossier Parish Sch. Bd., 528 U.S. 320 (U.S. 2000)
  …eclearanee of a redistricting plan enacted with a discriminatory but nonretro-gressive purpose. Appellants did not challenge the District Court’s determination that there was no evidence of retrogressive intent. We again noted probable jurisdiction. 525 U. S. 1118 (1999). [*327] J — i H-< Before proceeding to the merits, we must dispose of a challenge to our jurisdiction. The Board contends that these cases are now moot, since its 1992 plan "will never again be used for any purpose.” Motion to Dismiss or Aff…
• Amoco Prod. Co. v. Southern Ute Indian Tribe, 526 U.S. 865 (U.S. 1999)
  …Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit determined that the reservation of ‘‘coal” includes gas found within the coal formation, commonly referred to as coalbed methane gas (CBM gas). See 151 F. 3d 1251, 1256 (1998) (en banc). We granted certiorari, 525 U. S. 1118 (1999), and now reverse. I During the second half of the 19th century, Congress sought to encourage the settlement of the West by providing land in fee simple absolute to homesteaders who entered and cultivated tracts of a designated size for a pe…