InsideGov
Supreme Court · Decisions

Board of Education of Paris Union School District No. 95 et al. v. Vail

466 U.S. 377 · No. 83-87 · 1983 term · Burger Court

Decided Apr 23, 1984 · argued Feb 28, 1984

Due process · Due process: miscellaneous

The voteEach side

4–44 on each side

Equally divided: the decision below stands

Affirmed. Board of Education of Paris Union School District No. 95 et al. lost.

What this ruling means

Affirmed by an equally divided Court: with the justices split evenly, the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit stands, but the Court wrote no opinion and the ruling sets no precedent for other cases.

Board of Education of Paris Union School District No. 95 et al. was the petitioner, the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the case. “Lost” means the Court did not give 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.

Report a correction

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.

Report a correction

How the justices voted

The Court split evenly, 4–4, which leaves the lower court’s decision in place without an opinion. Each justice who took part is placed by their Martin–Quinn ideology score for the 1983 term.

More liberalMore conservativeMedianBrennanStevensBlackmunWhitePowellO'ConnorBurgerRehnquist

Took part(8)

Did not take part: Thurgood Marshall.

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.

Report a correction

The parties

Who brought the case to the Court, who answered it, and how it got there.

Petitioner
Board of Education of Paris Union School District No. 95 et al.Local school district or board of education (Illinois)
Respondent
VailGovernmental employee or job applicant (Illinois)
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.

Report a correction

The law at issue

The law the Court was asked to apply, and the kind of power it used to decide.

Decided by
Supreme Court supervision of lower federal or state courts or original jurisdiction
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.

Report a correction

Timeline

What happened at the Court and how the case got there, newest first.

  1. Apr 23, 1984DecidedDecided · Decided 4–4: affirmed. Board of Education of Paris Union School District No. 95 et al. lost.
  2. Feb 28, 1984ArguedArgued · Oral argument before the Court.
  3. Not datedTaken upTaken up · The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case (certiorari).
  4. Not datedCourt belowCourt below · Decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
  5. Not datedBeganBegan · The case began in the Illinois Central U.S. District 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.

Report a correction

Other decisions on the same issue

72 other argued cases since 1946 on due process: miscellaneous, newest first.

  1. Kahler v. KansasLandmark · Competence140 S. Ct. 1021Mar 23, 2020 · 140 S. Ct. 1021Due process6–36–3 band

  2. Obergefell v. HodgesLandmark · Discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity576 U.S. 644Jun 26, 2015 · 576 U.S. 644Due process5–45–4 band

  3. United States v. WindsorLandmark · Discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity570 U.S. 744Jun 26, 2013 · 570 U.S. 744Due process5–45–4 band

  4. Federal Communications Commission, et al., Petitioners v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., et al.567 U.S. 239Jun 21, 2012 · 567 U.S. 239Due process8–0Unanimous band

  5. Eric Michael Clark v. Arizona548 U.S. 735Jun 29, 2006 · 548 U.S. 735Due process5–45–4 band

  6. Keshia Cherie Ashford Dixon v. United States548 U.S. 1Jun 22, 2006 · 548 U.S. 1Due process7–27–2 band
  7. Bobby Lee Holmes v. South Carolina547 U.S. 319May 1, 2006 · 547 U.S. 319Due process9–0Unanimous band

  8. Town of Castle Rock, Colorado v. Gonzales, Individually and As Next Friend of Her Deceased Minor Children, Gonzales et al.545 U.S. 748Jun 27, 2005 · 545 U.S. 748Due process7–27–2 band

  9. Carman L. Deck v. Missouri544 U.S. 622May 23, 2005 · 544 U.S. 622Due process7–27–2 band

  10. Kansas v. Michael T. Crane534 U.S. 407Jan 22, 2002 · 534 U.S. 407Due process7–27–2 band

  11. Brentwood Academy v. Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association, et al.531 U.S. 288Feb 20, 2001 · 531 U.S. 288Due process5–45–4 band

  12. Mark Seling, Superintendent, Special Commitment Center v. Andre Brigham Young531 U.S. 250Jan 17, 2001 · 531 U.S. 250Due process8–18–1 band

  13. William Fiore v. Gregory White, Warden, et al.531 U.S. 225Jan 9, 2001 · 531 U.S. 225Due process9–0Unanimous band
  14. City of Chicago v. Jesus Morales et al.527 U.S. 41Jun 10, 1999 · 527 U.S. 41Due process6–36–3 band

  15. American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Company, et al. v. Delores Scott Sullivan et al.526 U.S. 40Mar 3, 1999 · 526 U.S. 40Due process8–18–1 band
  16. Kansas v. Leroy Hendricks521 U.S. 346Jun 23, 1997 · 521 U.S. 346Due process5–45–4 band
  17. Montana v. James Allen Egelhoff518 U.S. 37Jun 13, 1996 · 518 U.S. 37Due process5–45–4 band
  18. Byron Keith Cooper v. Oklahoma517 U.S. 348Apr 16, 1996 · 517 U.S. 348Due process9–0Unanimous band

  19. Leonard Heller, Secretary, Kentucky Cabinet for Human Resources v. Samuel Doe, by His Mother and Next Friend, Mary Doe, et al.509 U.S. 312Jun 24, 1993 · 509 U.S. 312Due process5–45–4 band
  20. Teofilo Medina, Jr. v. California505 U.S. 437Jun 22, 1992 · 505 U.S. 437Due process7–27–2 band
  21. Terry Foucha v. Louisiana504 U.S. 71May 18, 1992 · 504 U.S. 71Due process5–45–4 band
  22. Diane Griffin v. United States502 U.S. 46Dec 3, 1991 · 502 U.S. 46Due process8–0Unanimous band
  23. Edward Harold Schad, Jr. v. Arizona501 U.S. 624Jun 21, 1991 · 501 U.S. 624Due process5–45–4 band
  24. Michael H. et al. v. Gerald D.491 U.S. 110Jun 15, 1989 · 491 U.S. 110Due process5–45–4 band

  25. Arizona v. Youngblood, Larry488 U.S. 51Nov 29, 1988 · 488 U.S. 51Due process6–36–3 band
  26. Rivera v. Minnich483 U.S. 574Jun 25, 1987 · 483 U.S. 574Due process8–18–1 band

  27. Martin v. Ohio480 U.S. 228Feb 25, 1987 · 480 U.S. 228Due process5–45–4 band

  28. McMillan et al. v. Pennsylvania477 U.S. 79Jun 19, 1986 · 477 U.S. 79Due process5–45–4 band
  29. Atkins, Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Public Welfare v. Parker et al.472 U.S. 115Jun 4, 1985 · 472 U.S. 115Due process7–27–2 band
  30. Wasman v. United States468 U.S. 559Jul 3, 1984 · 468 U.S. 559Due process9–0Unanimous band
  31. California v. Trombetta et al.467 U.S. 479Jun 11, 1984 · 467 U.S. 479Due process9–0Unanimous band
  32. Jones v. United States463 U.S. 354Jun 29, 1983 · 463 U.S. 354Due process5–45–4 band
  33. Kolender, Chief of Police of San Diego, et al. v. Lawson461 U.S. 352May 2, 1983 · 461 U.S. 352Due process7–27–2 band
  34. Landon, District Director of the Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Plasencia459 U.S. 21Nov 15, 1982 · 459 U.S. 21Due process8–18–1 band

  35. Youngberg, Superintendent, Pennhurst State School and Hospital, et al. v. Romeo, an Incompetent, by His Mother and Next Friend, RomeoLandmark · Restrictions on involuntary commitment457 U.S. 307Jun 18, 1982 · 457 U.S. 307Due process9–0Unanimous band

  36. Hicks v. Oklahoma447 U.S. 343Jun 16, 1980 · 447 U.S. 343Due process8–18–1 band
  37. County Court of Ulster County, New York, et al. v. Allen et al.442 U.S. 140Jun 4, 1979 · 442 U.S. 140Due process5–45–4 band
  38. Addington v. TexasLandmark · Restrictions on involuntary commitment441 U.S. 418Apr 30, 1979 · 441 U.S. 418Due process8–0Unanimous band

  39. United States v. Grayson438 U.S. 41Jun 26, 1978 · 438 U.S. 41Due process6–36–3 band
  40. Memphis Light, Gas & Water Division et al. v. Craft et al.436 U.S. 1May 1, 1978 · 436 U.S. 1Due process6–36–3 band
  41. Patterson v. New York432 U.S. 197Jun 17, 1977 · 432 U.S. 197Due process5–36–3 band

  42. Usery, Secretary of Labor, et al. v. Turner Elkhorn Mining Co. et al.428 U.S. 1Jul 1, 1976 · 428 U.S. 1Due process6–27–2 band
  43. North v. Russell et al.427 U.S. 328Jun 25, 1976 · 427 U.S. 328Due process6–27–2 band

  44. United States v. Agurs427 U.S. 97Jun 24, 1976 · 427 U.S. 97Due process7–27–2 band
  45. Tennessee et al. v. Dunlap426 U.S. 312Jun 10, 1976 · 426 U.S. 312Due process9–0Unanimous band
  46. United States v. Powell423 U.S. 87Dec 2, 1975 · 423 U.S. 87Due process8–0Unanimous band
  47. O'Connor v. DonaldsonLandmark · Restrictions on involuntary commitment422 U.S. 563Jun 26, 1975 · 422 U.S. 563Due process9–0Unanimous band

  48. Mullaney et al. v. Wilbur421 U.S. 684Jun 9, 1975 · 421 U.S. 684Due process9–0Unanimous band

  49. Drope v. Missouri420 U.S. 162Feb 19, 1975 · 420 U.S. 162Due process9–0Unanimous band

  50. Barnes v. United States412 U.S. 837Jun 18, 1973 · 412 U.S. 837Due process6–36–3 band
  51. Vlandis v. Kline et al.412 U.S. 441Jun 11, 1973 · 412 U.S. 441Due process6–36–3 band
  52. United States v. Fuller et ux.409 U.S. 488Jan 16, 1973 · 409 U.S. 488Due process5–45–4 band
  53. Moore v. Illinois408 U.S. 786Jun 29, 1972 · 408 U.S. 786Due process5–45–4 band
  54. McNeil v. Director, Patuxent Institution407 U.S. 245Jun 19, 1972 · 407 U.S. 245Due process9–0Unanimous band
  55. Jackson v. IndianaLandmark · Restrictions on involuntary commitment406 U.S. 715Jun 7, 1972 · 406 U.S. 715Due process7–0Unanimous band

  56. Smith et al. v. Florida405 U.S. 172Feb 24, 1972 · 405 U.S. 172Due process7–0Unanimous band
  57. Papachristou et al. v. City of Jacksonville405 U.S. 156Feb 24, 1972 · 405 U.S. 156Due process7–0Unanimous band

  58. Giglio v. United States405 U.S. 150Feb 24, 1972 · 405 U.S. 150Due process7–0Unanimous band

  59. Groppi v. Leslie, Sheriff404 U.S. 496Jan 13, 1972 · 404 U.S. 496Due process7–0Unanimous band
  60. Palmer v. City of Euclid, Ohio402 U.S. 544May 24, 1971 · 402 U.S. 544Due process9–0Unanimous band
  61. Turner v. United States396 U.S. 398Jan 20, 1970 · 396 U.S. 398Due process6–27–2 band

  62. Giaccio v. Pennsylvania382 U.S. 399Jan 19, 1966 · 382 U.S. 399Due process9–0Unanimous band
  63. United States v. Romano et al.382 U.S. 136Nov 22, 1965 · 382 U.S. 136Due process9–0Unanimous band
  64. Holt et al. v. Virginia381 U.S. 131May 17, 1965 · 381 U.S. 131Due process8–18–1 band
  65. Hannah et al. v. Larche et al.363 U.S. 420Jun 20, 1960 · 363 U.S. 420Due process7–27–2 band
  66. Thompson v. City of Louisville et al.Landmark · Other areas362 U.S. 199Mar 21, 1960 · 362 U.S. 199Due process9–0Unanimous band

  67. Chessman v. Teets, Warden354 U.S. 156Jun 10, 1957 · 354 U.S. 156Due process5–36–3 band
  68. United States v. Cardiff344 U.S. 174Dec 8, 1952 · 344 U.S. 174Due process8–18–1 band
  69. Leland v. Oregon343 U.S. 790Jun 9, 1952 · 343 U.S. 790Due process7–27–2 band

  70. Federal Trade Commission v. Cement Institute et al.333 U.S. 683Apr 26, 1948 · 333 U.S. 683Due process6–18–1 band
  71. Parker v. Illinois333 U.S. 571Apr 5, 1948 · 333 U.S. 571Due process6–36–3 band
  72. Cole et al. v. Arkansas333 U.S. 196Mar 8, 1948 · 333 U.S. 196Due process9–0Unanimous 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.

Report a correction

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.