Patterson v. Mclean Credit Union (485 U.S. 617)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided April 25, 1988 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 485 U.S. 617 · 108 S. Ct. 1419
- Decided
- April 25, 1988
- Term
- October Term 1987
- Vote
- 5–4
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Stay, petition, or motion granted
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Per Curiam. This case is restored to the calendar for reargument. The parties are requested to brief and argue the following question: “Whether or not the interpretation of 42 U. S. C. § 1981 adopted by this Court in Runyon v. McCrary, 427 U. S. 160 (1976), should be reconsidered?” One might think from the dissents of our colleagues from the above order that our decision to hear argument as to whether the decision in Runyon v. McCrary, 427 U. S. 160 (1976), should be reconsidered is a “first” in the history of the Court. One would also think from the language of the dissents that we have decided today to overrule Runyon v. McCrary. We have of course done no such thing, but have decided, in light of the difficulties posed by petitioner’s argument for a fundamental extension of liability under 42 U. S. C. § 1981, to consider whether Runyon should be overruled. It is surely no affront to settled jurisprudence to request argument on whether a particular precedent should be modified or overruled. Three Terms ago, for example, we requested the parties to reargue the validity of our decision in National League of Cities v. Usery, 426 U. S. 833 (1976). Garcia v. San Anto nio Metropolitan Transit Authority, 468 U. S. 1213 (1984) (ordering reargument), 469 U. S. 528 (1985) (decision). Two Terms before that we requested the parties to reargue and brief the question whether the Fourth…
Excerpt of a 12,083-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.