Wright et al. v. Georgia
373 U.S. 284 · No. 68 · 1962 term · Warren Court
Decided May 20, 1963 · argued Nov 7, 1962
Civil rights · Sit-in demonstrations
Struck down a state law
Majority opinion: Earl Warren
The voteMajority
9–09 in the majority, 0 in dissent
No dissent (9–0)
Reversed. Wright et al. won.
What this ruling means
Reversed: the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the Georgia Supreme Court, and its own ruling ends the case.
Wright et al. was the petitioner, the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the case. “Won” means the Court gave that side the result it asked for.
From the Supreme Court Database. A justice who agreed with the result but not the reasoning counts in the majority.
Summary
The opening of the case’s Wikipedia article: what the case was about and what the Court held.
Wikipedia has no article on this case, so there is no summary.
Data notes
The text is Wikipedia’s (CC BY-SA 4.0), matched to the case by its citation, docket number or name and year, and is not checked against the opinion. The site keeps the article’s opening section, ending on its last full sentence. The one-sentence summary under the title is the Decisions list’s: Wikipedia’s own ruling sentence, or, tagged “AI-written”, one Claude wrote from this opening.
How the justices voted
Each justice who took part, placed by their Martin–Quinn ideology score for the 1962 term. Filled: the 9 in the majority. Hollow: the 0 in dissent. Colour is the party of the president who appointed them.
Majority(9)
Earl WarrenWrote the majority opinion
William DouglasJoined the majority
Hugo BlackJoined the majority
William BrennanJoined the majority
Arthur GoldbergJoined the majority
Byron WhiteJoined the majority
Potter StewartJoined the majority
Tom ClarkJoined the majority
John HarlanJoined the majority
Dissent(0)
- None.
Data notes
Each justice’s vote and what they wrote are from the justice-centered file of the Supreme Court Database. “Wrote a concurrence” means the justice sided with the majority and wrote separately; a justice who dissented in part is counted on the side they took overall. A justice who wrote nothing is listed as joining their side.
Positions are each justice’s Martin–Quinn score for the case’s term, the same scores as the Ideology page: negative is more liberal, positive more conservative. A score sums up a justice’s votes across the whole term, so it says where they usually sit, not why they voted as they did here. The median line is the Court’s median justice that term.
The parties
Who brought the case to the Court, who answered it, and how it got there.
- Petitioner
- Wright et al.Person or organization protesting racial or ethnic segregation or discrimination
- Respondent
- GeorgiaState (Georgia)
- Reached the Court by
- Certiorari (the Court chose to hear it)
Data notes
The names are the two sides of the case’s title. The description under each is the Supreme Court Database’s category for that party, in its own wording. The petitioner is the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the decision below. “Why it was taken” appears only when the majority opinion says lower courts disagreed or were unsure about the question; reasons that would fit any case (“to resolve the question presented”, “an important question”) are left out.
The law at issue
The law the Court was asked to apply, and the kind of power it used to decide.
- Provision
- Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection)
- Kind of law
- Constitutional Amendment
- Decided by
- Judicial review (state level); Supreme Court supervision of lower federal or state courts or original jurisdiction
- Struck down
- A state law, as unconstitutional
Data notes
The Supreme Court Database codes the main constitutional provision, statute or court rule each case turned on, and the basis of the decision: judicial review of a federal or state law, interpreting a statute, supervising the lower courts, and so on. A case can rest on more than one. “Overruled” counts only where the majority opinion says so.
Timeline
What happened at the Court and how the case got there, newest first.
- May 20, 1963DecidedDecided · Decided 9–0: reversed. Wright et al. won.
- Nov 7, 1962ArguedArgued · Oral argument before the Court.
- Not datedTaken upTaken up · The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case (certiorari).
- Not datedCourt belowCourt below · Decided by the Georgia Supreme Court: affirmed.
- Not datedBeganBegan · The case began in the Georgia trial court.
Data notes
From the Supreme Court Database: the court the case began in, the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed and what that court did, how the case came to the Court, and the dates of argument and decision. The database does not date the steps in the lower courts. Court names are the database’s.
Other decisions on the same issue
16 other argued cases since 1946 on sit-in demonstrations, newest first.
- Brown et al. v. Louisiana383 U.S. 131Feb 23, 1966 · 383 U.S. 131Civil rights5–45–4 band
- McKinnie et al. v. Tennessee380 U.S. 449Apr 5, 1965 · 380 U.S. 449Civil rights5–45–4 band
- Abernathy et al. v. Alabama.380 U.S. 447Apr 5, 1965 · 380 U.S. 447Civil rights7–0Unanimous band
- Hamm v. City of Rock Hill379 U.S. 306Dec 14, 1964 · 379 U.S. 306Civil rights5–45–4 band
- Bouie et al. v. City of Columbia378 U.S. 347Jun 22, 1964 · 378 U.S. 347Civil rights6–36–3 band
- Bell et al. v. Maryland378 U.S. 226Jun 22, 1964 · 378 U.S. 226Civil rights6–36–3 band
- Robinson et al. v. Florida378 U.S. 153Jun 22, 1964 · 378 U.S. 153Civil rights9–0Unanimous band
- Barr et al. v. City of Columbia378 U.S. 146Jun 22, 1964 · 378 U.S. 146Civil rights9–0Unanimous band
- Griffin et al. v. Maryland378 U.S. 130Jun 22, 1964 · 378 U.S. 130Civil rights6–36–3 band
- Avent et al. v. North Carolina.373 U.S. 375May 20, 1963 · 373 U.S. 375Civil rights8–18–1 band
- Gober et al. v. City of Birmingham373 U.S. 374May 20, 1963 · 373 U.S. 374Civil rights8–18–1 band
- Lombard et al. v. Louisiana373 U.S. 267May 20, 1963 · 373 U.S. 267Civil rights8–18–1 band
- Shuttlesworth et al. v. City of Birmingham373 U.S. 262May 20, 1963 · 373 U.S. 262Civil rights8–18–1 band
- Peterson et al. v. City of Greenville373 U.S. 244May 20, 1963 · 373 U.S. 244Civil rights9–0Unanimous band
- Garner et al. v. LouisianaLandmark · Discrimination based on race and ethnicity368 U.S. 157Dec 11, 1961 · 368 U.S. 157Civil rightsLandmark · Discrimination based on race and ethnicity9–0Unanimous band
- Boynton v. VirginiaLandmark · Discrimination based on race and ethnicity364 U.S. 454Dec 5, 1960 · 364 U.S. 454Civil rightsLandmark · Discrimination based on race and ethnicity7–27–2 band
Data notes
Every other orally argued case with a clear vote, from the 1946 term on, that the Supreme Court Database files under the same issue as this one. The database gives each case one issue from a list of about 270 (abortion, search and seizure of vehicles, the death penalty, and so on), whatever law it turned on.
Official record
Read the full opinion on Justia and the argument audio on Oyez. Case data from the Supreme Court Database, Version 2026 Release 01, through the 2025 term.