Ingraham v. Wright

Ingraham v. Wright
Ingraham v. Wright
	Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 2–3, 1976; Decided April 19, 1977
Full case name	Ingraham, et al., v. Wright, et al.
Citations	430 U.S. 651 (more) 97 S. Ct. 1401; 51 L. Ed. 2d 711
Argument	Oral argument
Reargument	Reargument
Opinion announcement	Opinion announcement
Holding
	The cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment did not apply to corporal punishment as a disciplinary practice in public schools, and the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment did not require notice or a hearing prior to imposition of such punishment, as the state's laws authorized the practice and allowed common law constraints and remedies. The primary purpose of the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause has always been considered, and properly so, to be directed at the method or kind of punishment imposed for the violation of criminal statutes. When public school teachers or administrators impose disciplinary corporal punishment, the Eight Amendment is inapplicable (lexisnexis)
Court membership
	Chief Justice Warren E. Burger Associate Justices William J. Brennan Jr. · Potter Stewart; Byron White · Thurgood Marshall; Harry Blackmun · Lewis F. Powell Jr.; William Rehnquist · John P. Stevens
Case opinions
Majority	Powell, joined by Burger, Stewart, Blackmun, Rehnquist
Dissent	White, joined by Brennan, Marshall, Stevens
Dissent	Stevens
Laws applied
	U.S. Const. amends. VIII, XIV

Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651 (1977), was a United States Supreme Court case that upheld the disciplinary corporal punishment policy of Florida's public schools by a 5-4 vote. The judgment specified that such corporal punishments have no prohibition in public schools unless those punishments are “degrading or unduly severe”.^[1]^[2]^[3]

^ "Ingraham v. Wright". Oyez. Retrieved October 13, 2021.
^ "Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651 (1977)". Justia Law. Retrieved May 18, 2021.
^ Rosenberg, Irene Merker (1978). "Ingraham v. Wright: The Supreme Court's Whipping Boy". Columbia Law Review. 78 (1): 75–110. doi:10.2307/1121951. ISSN 0010-1958. JSTOR 1121951.

[1] "Ingraham v. Wright". Oyez. Retrieved October 13, 2021.

[2] "Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651 (1977)". Justia Law. Retrieved May 18, 2021.

[3] Rosenberg, Irene Merker (1978). "Ingraham v. Wright: The Supreme Court's Whipping Boy". Columbia Law Review. 78 (1): 75–110. doi:10.2307/1121951. ISSN 0010-1958. JSTOR 1121951.

[1]

[2]

[3]

Ingraham v. Wright
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 2–3, 1976 Decided April 19, 1977
Full case name	Ingraham, et al., v. Wright, et al.
Citations	430 U.S. 651 (more) 97 S. Ct. 1401; 51 L. Ed. 2d 711
Argument	Oral argument
Reargument	Reargument
Opinion announcement	Opinion announcement
Holding
The cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment did not apply to corporal punishment as a disciplinary practice in public schools, and the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment did not require notice or a hearing prior to imposition of such punishment, as the state's laws authorized the practice and allowed common law constraints and remedies. The primary purpose of the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause has always been considered, and properly so, to be directed at the method or kind of punishment imposed for the violation of criminal statutes. When public school teachers or administrators impose disciplinary corporal punishment, the Eight Amendment is inapplicable (lexisnexis)
Court membership
Chief Justice Warren E. Burger Associate Justices William J. Brennan Jr. · Potter Stewart Byron White · Thurgood Marshall Harry Blackmun · Lewis F. Powell Jr. William Rehnquist · John P. Stevens
Case opinions
Majority	Powell, joined by Burger, Stewart, Blackmun, Rehnquist
Dissent	White, joined by Brennan, Marshall, Stevens
Dissent	Stevens
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amends. VIII, XIV