Reitman v. Mulkey case brief

Reitman v. Mulkey case brief summary

387 U.S. 369 (1967)

CASE SYNOPSIS

In actions brought by respondent tenants alleging they had been discriminated against by petitioner landlords, petitioners challenged a decision of the California Supreme Court holding that Cal. Constitutional Article I, § 26, which forbade the state from limiting a person's right to decline to lease or sell real property in his absolute discretion, violated the equal protection clause ofU.S. Constitutional Amendment XIV, § 1.

CASE FACTS
Respondent tenants sued petitioner landlords, alleging that petitioners had discriminated against them on the basis of race, in violation of Cal. Civ. Code §§ 51 and 52. One trial court held that Cal. Constitutional Article I, § 26, which forbade the state from limiting a person's right to refuse to sell or lease real property in his absolute discretion, rendered §§ 51 and 52 null and void; another trial court denied petitioner's motion for a declaratory judgment that he could terminate one of the respondent's tenancies even if such eviction was based on racial considerations. In a consolidated appeal, the California Supreme Court held that Article I, § 26 was invalid, as it violated the equal protection clause of U.S. Constitutional Amendment XIV, § 1.


DISCUSSION

• The United States Supreme Court affirmed. 
• Although the state was permitted a neutral position regarding private racial discrimination and was not required to forbid such discrimination, the California Supreme Court had properly concluded that Article I, § 26 constituted prohibited state involvement in private discrimination, as it represented affirmative state action designed to authorize and make legally possible private discrimination.

CONCLUSION
The Court affirmed the judgment.

Suggested Study Aids and Books