Aikens v. California
406 U.S. 813 · Decided June 7, 1972 · 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
Aikens v. California was decided on June 7, 1972 unanimously (9–0). SCDB codes the disposition as “petition denied or appeal dismissed.” The decision was issued per curiam (an unsigned opinion of the Court). SCDB classifies its main issue as “Mootness” in the Judicial Power area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 406 U.S. 813 · 92 S. Ct. 1931 · 32 L. Ed. 2d 511 · 1972 U.S. LEXIS 52
- Docket number
- 68-5027
- Decided
- June 7, 1972
- Argued
- January 17, 1972
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Per curiam (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Petition denied or appeal dismissed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 9–0 (unanimous)
- 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 | 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 | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority |
Full case caption
Aikens v. California
SCDB identifiers: case 1971-132, docket 1971-132-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Mootness”
- Bradley v. United States
- Securities and Exchange Commission v. Medical Committee for Human Rights
- Diffenderfer v. Central Baptist Church of Miami
- Johnson v. New York State Education Department
- North Carolina v. Rice
- Dillard v. Industrial Commission of Virginia
Cases on the same legal provision: Article III, Section 2, Paragraph 1 (case or controversy requirement)
- Goosby v. Osser
- Gilligan v. Morgan
- Moore v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education
- O'Shea v. Littleton
- Steffel v. Thompson
- Defunis v. Odegaard
Same Term, same area (Judicial Power)
- Hicks v. Pleasure House, Inc.
- Slayton v. Smith
- North Carolina v. Rice
- Securities and Exchange Commission v. Medical Committee for Human Rights
- Diffenderfer v. Central Baptist Church of Miami
- Board of Regents of the University of Texas System v. New Left Education Project
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