Defunis v. Odegaard
416 U.S. 312 · Decided April 23, 1974 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
Defunis v. Odegaard was decided on April 23, 1974 by a vote of 5–4. The Court vacated the lower court's decision and remanded the case. The decision was issued per curiam (an unsigned opinion of the Court). SCDB classifies its main issue as “Affirmative action” in the Civil Rights area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 416 U.S. 312 · 94 S. Ct. 1704 · 40 L. Ed. 2d 164 · 1974 U.S. LEXIS 128
- Docket number
- 73-235
- Decided
- April 23, 1974
- Argued
- February 26, 1974
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Per curiam (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 5–4
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Affirmative action
- Issue area
- Civil Rights
- Legal provision
- Article III, Section 2, Paragraph 1 (case or controversy requirement)
- Type of law
- Constitution
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William O. Douglas | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Dissent | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Dissent | |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority |
Full case caption
Defunis et al. v. Odegaard et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1973-092, docket 1973-092-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Affirmative action”
- Morton v. Mancari
- Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
- Southeastern Community College v. Davis
- United Steelworkers of America v. Weber
- Fullilove v. Klutznick
- Minnick v. California Department of Corrections
Cases on the same legal provision: Article III, Section 2, Paragraph 1 (case or controversy requirement)
- Super Tire Engineering Co. v. McCorkle
- Steffel v. Thompson
- Vermont v. New York
- O'Shea v. Littleton
- Gilligan v. Morgan
- United States v. New Jersey State Lottery Commission
Same Term, same area (Civil Rights)
- United States Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Hibi
- Dennett v. Hogan
- Department of Game of Washington v. Puyallup Tribe
- Kusper v. PontikesLaw held unconstitutional
- Espinoza et Vir v. Farah Manufacturing Co., Inc.
- O'Brien v. SkinnerLaw held unconstitutional
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error