Wisconsin v. Constantineau
400 U.S. 433 · Decided January 19, 1971 · Supreme Court of the United States
At a glance
Wisconsin v. Constantineau was decided on January 19, 1971 by a vote of 6–3. The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice William O. Douglas wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Due process, hearing or notice” in the Due Process area. SCDB records that the Court declared a state or territorial law, regulation or constitutional provision unconstitutional.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 400 U.S. 433 · 91 S. Ct. 507 · 27 L. Ed. 2d 515 · 1971 U.S. LEXIS 90
- Docket number
- 95
- Decided
- January 19, 1971
- Argued
- December 10, 1970
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 6–3
- Majority opinion
- William O. Douglas
- Opinion assigned by
- William O. Douglas
- How the case arrived
- Appeal
- Issue (SCDB)
- Due process, hearing or notice
- Issue area
- Due Process
- Legal provision
- Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Held unconstitutional
- A state or territorial law, regulation or constitutional provision
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Hugo L. Black | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice William O. Douglas | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice John M. Harlan II | Majority | |
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Majority | |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Dissent |
Full case caption
Wisconsin v. Constantineau
SCDB identifiers: case 1970-024, docket 1970-024-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Due process, hearing or notice”
- Bell v. BursonLaw held unconstitutional
- Jennings v. Mahoney
- Thorpe v. Housing Authority of the City of Durham
- Dillard v. Industrial Commission of Virginia
- Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co.
- Goss v. LopezLaw held unconstitutional
Cases on the same legal provision: Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Mayberry v. Pennsylvania
- Boddie v. ConnecticutLaw held unconstitutional
- North Carolina v. Alford
- McGautha v. California
- Palmer v. City of EuclidLaw held unconstitutional
- Coates v. City of CincinnatiLaw held unconstitutional
Same Term, same area (Due Process)
- Bell v. BursonLaw held unconstitutional
- Palmer v. City of EuclidLaw 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