Securities and Exchange Commission v. Medical Committee for Human Rights
404 U.S. 403 · Decided January 10, 1972 · Supreme Court of the United States
At a glance
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Medical Committee for Human Rights was decided on January 10, 1972 by a vote of 6–1. The Court vacated the lower court's decision and remanded the case. Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Mootness” in the Judicial Power area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 404 U.S. 403 · 92 S. Ct. 577 · 30 L. Ed. 2d 560 · 1972 U.S. LEXIS 149
- Docket number
- 70-61
- Decided
- January 10, 1972
- Argued
- November 10, 1971
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 6–1
- Majority opinion
- Thurgood Marshall
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Mootness
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- 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. | Majority | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority |
Did not participate: Lewis F. Powell Jr., William H. Rehnquist.
Full case caption
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Medical Committee for Human Rights
SCDB identifiers: case 1971-034, docket 1971-034-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Mootness”
- Diffenderfer v. Central Baptist Church of Miami
- Bradley v. United States
- North Carolina v. Rice
- Aikens v. California
- Durham v. United States
- Johnson v. New York State Education Department
Cases on the same legal provision: Article III, Section 2, Paragraph 1 (case or controversy requirement)
- Moore v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education
- Goosby v. Osser
- Gilligan v. Morgan
- United States v. Armour & Co.
- Association of Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc. v. Camp
- Barlow v. Collins
Same Term, same area (Judicial Power)
- Hicks v. Pleasure House, Inc.
- Slayton v. Smith
- North Carolina v. Rice
- Diffenderfer v. Central Baptist Church of Miami
- Board of Regents of the University of Texas System v. New Left Education Project
- United States v. Christian Echoes National Ministry, Inc.
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