Moore v. New York
333 U.S. 565 · Decided March 29, 1948 · 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
Moore v. New York was decided on March 29, 1948 by a vote of 5–4. The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice Robert H. Jackson wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Desegregation (general)” in the Civil Rights area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 333 U.S. 565 · 68 S. Ct. 705 · 92 L. Ed. 2d 881 · 1948 U.S. LEXIS 2373
- Docket number
- 485
- Decided
- March 29, 1948
- Argued
- February 12, 1948
- Court era
- Vinson 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
- Robert H. Jackson
- Opinion assigned by
- Fred M. Vinson
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Desegregation (general)
- Issue area
- Civil Rights
- Legal provision
- Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Hugo L. Black | Dissent | |
| Justice Stanley F. Reed | Majority | |
| Justice Felix Frankfurter | Majority | |
| Justice William O. Douglas | Dissent | |
| Justice Frank Murphy | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Robert H. Jackson | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Wiley B. Rutledge | Dissent | |
| Justice Harold H. Burton | Majority | |
| Chief Justice Fred M. Vinson | Majority |
Full case caption
Moore et al. v. New York
SCDB identifiers: case 1947-061, docket 1947-061-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Desegregation (general)”
- Shelley et Ux. v. Kraemer et Ux.
- Hurd et Ux. v. Hodge
- Bob-Lo Excursion Co. v. Michigan
- Oyama v. CaliforniaLaw held unconstitutional
- Patton v. Mississippi
- Cassell v. Texas
Cases on the same legal provision: Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Parker v. Illinois
- Cole v. Arkansas
- In re Oliver
- Paterno v. Lyons
- Lee v. Mississippi
- Sherrer v. SherrerAltered precedent
Same Term, same area (Civil Rights)
- Delgadillo v. Carmichael
- Patton v. Mississippi
- Sipuel v. Board of Regents of the University of OklahomaLaw held unconstitutional
- Oyama v. CaliforniaLaw held unconstitutional
- Le Maistre v. Leffers
- Fong Haw Tan v. Phelan
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