Martin v. Wilks
490 U.S. 755 · Decided June 12, 1989 · 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
Martin v. Wilks was decided on June 12, 1989 by a vote of 5–4. The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Affirmative action” in the Civil Rights area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 490 U.S. 755 · 109 S. Ct. 2180 · 104 L. Ed. 2d 835 · 1989 U.S. LEXIS 2849
- Docket number
- 87-1614
- Decided
- June 12, 1989
- Argued
- January 18, 1989
- Court era
- Rehnquist Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 5–4
- Majority opinion
- William H. Rehnquist
- Opinion assigned by
- William H. Rehnquist
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Affirmative action
- Issue area
- Civil Rights
- Legal provision
- Federal Rules of Civil or Appellate Procedure
- Type of law
- Court rules
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Dissent | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Dissent | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Dissent | |
| Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Majority | |
| Justice Antonin Scalia | Majority | |
| Justice Anthony M. Kennedy | Majority |
Full case caption
Martin et al. v. Wilks et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1988-102, docket 1988-102-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Affirmative action”
- City of Richmond v. J. A. Croson CompanyLaw held unconstitutional
- Metro Broadcasting, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission
- Johnson v. Transportation Agency
- United States v. Paradise
- Local 28 of the Sheet Metal Workers' International Association v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- Local Number 93 v. City of Cleveland
Cases on the same legal provision: Federal Rules of Civil or Appellate Procedure
- Osterneck v. Ernst & Whinney
- Pavelic & Leflore v. Marvel Entertainment Group
- Missouri v. Jenkins
- Houston v. Lack
- Torres v. Oakland Scavenger Co.
- Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corporation
Same Term, same area (Civil Rights)
- Town of Huntington v. Huntington Branch
- Penson v. Ohio
- Pittston Coal Group v. Sebben
- Owens v. Okure
- City of Richmond v. J. A. Croson CompanyLaw held unconstitutional
- In re McDonald
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