Appellate Briefs And Opinions

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

  • United States v. County of Maricopa (9th Cir.) - Appellee
    • The district court correctly held that the County is liable under Section 14141 and Title VI for the unconstitutional policies and conduct of Sheriff Arpaio and the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office
    • The County is liable under, and bound by, the findings of unlawful discrimination in Melendres
    Document Date 
    Brief as Appellee 09/16/16
  • Flores v. United States Department of Justice (D.C. Cir.) - Respondent
    • Flores's petition for review should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because he does not have the right to judicial review under either Title VI or the Administrative Procedure Act
    • Petitioner's motion for a preliminary injunction is frivolous on its face
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Order 01/20/15
    Motion to Dismiss 10/14/14
    Response to Motion for a Preliminary Injunction 10/06/14
  • Zeno v. Pine Plains Central School District (2d Cir.) - Amicus
    • A school district can be found deliberately indifferent to known acts of student-on-student racial harassment under Title VI where it knows that individual disciplinary measures have not prevented persistent racial harassment, and yet fails to implement additional remedial action targeted to ending the harassment
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 702 F.3d 655 12/03/12
    Brief as Amicus 04/21/11
  • Williams v. Port Huron Area School District (6th Cir.) - Amicus
    • The standard for Title VI racial harassment claims is the deliberate indifference standard employed in Title IX cases
    • The evidence is sufficient for a reasonable factfinder to find that the school district was deliberately indifferent to the harassment from 2003-2006
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, available at 455 F. App'x 612 01/09/12
    Brief as Amicus 03/09/11
  • Ayers v. Musgrove (S. Ct. and 5th Cir.) -- Appellee
    • The district court did not abuse its discretion when it approved the settlement agreement
    • The district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied the motion to opt out of the class
    Document Date 
    Certiorari Denied, reported at 125 S. Ct. 372 10/18/04
    Opposition to Petition for Writ of Certiorari 09/15/04
    Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 358 F.3d 356 01/27/04
    Brief as Appellee 05/12/03



Browse Briefs by Category

Access to Justice
Affirmative Action
Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
Constitutionality of Federal Statutes
Employment Discrimination (Race, National Origin, Sex, and Religion)
Equal Credit Opportunity Act
Equal Protection Clause
Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
Institutionalized Persons
Police Misconduct (Civil Cases)
Religion Cases
Servicemember Cases
Third Party Intervention in Civil Rights Cases
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Updated March 8, 2019

Was this page helpful?

Was this page helpful?
Yes No