University of Texas v. Camenisch
451 U.S. 390 · Decided April 29, 1981 · 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
University of Texas v. Camenisch was decided on April 29, 1981 unanimously (9–0). The Court vacated the lower court's decision and remanded the case. Justice Potter Stewart wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Mootness” in the Judicial Power area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 451 U.S. 390 · 101 S. Ct. 1830 · 68 L. Ed. 2d 175 · 1981 U.S. LEXIS 91
- Docket number
- 80-317
- Decided
- April 29, 1981
- Argued
- March 31, 1981
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 9–0 (unanimous)
- Majority opinion
- Potter Stewart
- 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 J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Majority | |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority |
Full case caption
University of Texas et al. v. Camenisch
SCDB identifiers: case 1980-081, docket 1980-081-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Mootness”
- Tully v. Mobil Oil Corp.
- Murphy v. Hunt
- Lane v. Williams
- Johnson v. Board of Education of the City of Chicago
- Crowell v. Mader
- Great Western Sugar Co. v. Nelson
Cases on the same legal provision: Article III, Section 2, Paragraph 1 (case or controversy requirement)
- H. L. v. Matheson
- Watt v. Energy Action Educational Foundation
- Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc.
- Railway Labor Executives' Assn. v. GibbonsLaw held unconstitutional
- Andrus v. Idaho
- Deposit Guaranty National Bank of Jackson v. Roper
Same Term, same area (Judicial Power)
- Allied Chemical Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc.
- County of Imperial v. Munoz
- Pacileo v. Walker
- Vincent v. Texas
- Federal Trade Commission v. Standard Oil Company of California
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Risjord
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