Wright v. Rockefeller
376 U.S. 52 · Decided February 17, 1964 · 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
Wright v. Rockefeller was decided on February 17, 1964 by a vote of 7–2. The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice Hugo L. Black wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Reapportionment (other than Voting Rights Act plans)” in the Civil Rights area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 376 U.S. 52 · 84 S. Ct. 603 · 11 L. Ed. 2d 512 · 1964 U.S. LEXIS 1774
- Docket number
- 96
- Decided
- February 17, 1964
- Argued
- November 19, 1963
- Court era
- Warren Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 7–2
- Majority opinion
- Hugo L. Black
- Opinion assigned by
- Earl Warren
- How the case arrived
- Appeal
- Issue area
- Civil Rights
- Legal provision
- Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Hugo L. Black | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice William O. Douglas | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Tom C. Clark | Majority | |
| Chief Justice Earl Warren | Majority | |
| Justice John M. Harlan II | Concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Arthur J. Goldberg | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
Full case caption
Wright et al. v. Rockefeller, Governor of New York, et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1963-048, docket 1963-048-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Reapportionment (other than Voting Rights Act plans)”
- Wesberry v. SandersAltered precedentLaw held unconstitutional
- Martin v. BushLaw held unconstitutional
- Reynolds v. SimsLaw held unconstitutional
- Wmca, Inc. v. LomenzoLaw held unconstitutional
- Maryland Committee for Fair Representation v. TawesLaw held unconstitutional
- Davis v. MannLaw held unconstitutional
Cases on the same legal provision: Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection)
- Anderson v. MartinLaw held unconstitutional
- Arnold v. North Carolina
- Coleman v. Alabama
- Murphy v. Waterfront Commission of New York HarborAltered precedent
- Griffin v. Maryland
- Robinson v. Florida
Same Term, same area (Civil Rights)
- Shockey v. Illinois
- Ausbie v. California
- Daegele v. Kansas
- Herrear v. Heinze
- Tabb v. California
- Foti v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
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