Pavan v. Smith
137 S. Ct. 2075 · Decided June 26, 2017 · Supreme Court of the United States
At a glance
Pavan v. Smith was decided on June 26, 2017 by a vote of 6–3. The Court reversed the lower court's decision and remanded the case. The decision was issued per curiam (an unsigned opinion of the Court). SCDB classifies its main issue as “Due process, miscellaneous” in the Due Process area. SCDB records that the Court declared a state or territorial law, regulation or constitutional provision unconstitutional.
Read the opinion
- CourtListener (Free Law Project) — opinion text
- Supreme Court of the United States — slip opinions, October Term 2016
Case details
- Citations
- 137 S. Ct. 2075 · 198 L. Ed. 2d 636 · 2017 U.S. LEXIS 4064
- Docket number
- 16-992
- Decided
- June 26, 2017
- Court era
- Roberts Court
- Decision type
- Per curiam (no oral argument)
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 6–3
- Opinion assigned by
- John G. Roberts Jr.
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Due process, miscellaneous
- Issue area
- Due Process
- Legal provision
- Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection)
- 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 Anthony M. Kennedy | Majority | |
| Justice Clarence Thomas | Dissent | |
| Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg | Majority | |
| Justice Stephen G. Breyer | Majority | |
| Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. | Dissent | |
| Justice Sonia Sotomayor | Majority | |
| Justice Elena Kagan | Majority | |
| Justice Neil M. Gorsuch | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
Full case caption
Pavan v. Smith
SCDB identifiers: case 2016-081, docket 2016-081-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Due process, miscellaneous”
- Obergefell v. HodgesAltered precedentLaw held unconstitutional
- Kahler v. Kansas
- United States v. WindsorLaw held unconstitutional
- Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television Stations, Inc.
- Eric Michael Clark v. Arizona
- Keshia Cherie Ashford Dixon v. United States
Cases on the same legal provision: Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection)
- Cooper v. HarrisLaw held unconstitutional
- Bethune-Hill v. Va Bd. of Elections
- North Carolina v. Covington
- Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin
- Foster v. Chatman
- Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission
Same Term, same area (Due Process)
- Michael Damon Rippo v. Renee Baker
- Nelson v. ColoradoLaw held unconstitutional
- BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell
- Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of Ca.
- Murr v. Wisconsin
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