Sailors v. Board of Education of the County of Kent
387 U.S. 105 · Decided May 22, 1967 · 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
Sailors v. Board of Education of the County of Kent was decided on May 22, 1967 unanimously (9–0). The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice William O. Douglas wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Reapportionment (other than Voting Rights Act plans)” in the Civil Rights area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 387 U.S. 105 · 87 S. Ct. 1549 · 18 L. Ed. 2d 650 · 1967 U.S. LEXIS 1398
- Docket number
- 430
- Decided
- May 22, 1967
- Argued
- April 17, 1967
- Court era
- Warren Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 9–0 (unanimous)
- Majority opinion
- William O. Douglas
- Opinion assigned by
- Earl Warren
- How the case arrived
- Appeal
- Issue area
- Civil Rights
- Legal provision
- Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Hugo L. Black | Majority | |
| Justice William O. Douglas | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Tom C. Clark | Majority | |
| Chief Justice Earl Warren | Majority | |
| Justice John M. Harlan II | Special concurrence | |
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Special concurrence | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Abe Fortas | Majority |
Full case caption
Sailors et al. v. Board of Education of the County of Kent et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1966-098, docket 1966-098-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Reapportionment (other than Voting Rights Act plans)”
- Dusch v. Davis
- Kilgarlin v. Hill
- Swann v. AdamsLaw held unconstitutional
- Fortson v. Morris
- Lucas v. RhodesLaw held unconstitutional
- Rockefeller v. WellsLaw held unconstitutional
Cases on the same legal provision: Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection)
- Reitman v. MulkeyLaw held unconstitutional
- Anders v. California
- Loving et Ux. v. VirginiaLaw held unconstitutional
- Swenson v. Bosler
- Whitus v. Georgia
- Coleman v. Alabama
Same Term, same area (Civil Rights)
- Long v. District Court of Iowa in and for Lee County
- Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Errico
- Fortson v. Morris
- Woodby v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
- Swann v. AdamsLaw held unconstitutional
- Whitus v. Georgia
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