Regents of the University of Michigan v. Ewing
474 U.S. 214 · Decided December 12, 1985 · 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
Regents of the University of Michigan v. Ewing was decided on December 12, 1985 unanimously (9–0). The Court reversed the lower court's decision and remanded the case. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Due process, hearing or notice” in the Due Process area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 474 U.S. 214 · 106 S. Ct. 507 · 88 L. Ed. 2d 523 · 1985 U.S. LEXIS 149
- Docket number
- 84-1273
- Decided
- December 12, 1985
- Argued
- October 8, 1985
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 9–0 (unanimous)
- Majority opinion
- John Paul Stevens
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Due process, hearing or notice
- Issue area
- Due Process
- 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 William J. Brennan Jr. | 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. | Concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Majority |
Full case caption
Regents of the University of Michigan v. Ewing
SCDB identifiers: case 1985-018, docket 1985-018-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Due process, hearing or notice”
- Brock v. Roadway Express, Inc.
- R. 'roy' Peralta v. Heights Medical Center, Inc.
- Tulsa Professional Collection Services, Inc. v. Joanne PopeLaw held unconstitutional
- Illinois v. Batchelder
- Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Mallen
- Mennonite Board of Missions v. AdamsLaw held unconstitutional
Cases on the same legal provision: Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Hill v. Lockhart
- Wainwright v. Greenfield
- Daniels v. WilliamsAltered precedent
- Davidson v. Cannon
- Aetna Life Insurance Co. v. Lavoie
- Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts
Same Term, same area (Due Process)
- Connolly v. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
- Aetna Life Insurance Co. v. Lavoie
- Lyng v. Payne
- Bowen v. Public Agencies Opposed to Social Security Entrapment
- McMillan v. Pennsylvania
- Macdonald v. County of Yolo
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