Case Citator › Bouie v. City of Columbia

Bouie v. City of Columbia

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Limited by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
378 U.S. 347
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
74 of 74
Citing cases (total)
1,779
Treatment dates
2001
Limited by some courts
At least one reviewed court has limited this case’s holding to narrower facts or a narrower rule. No reviewed court has overruled it. Bouie v. City of Columbia is limited. All 74 flagged citations were read.
More on how this was screened

The confirmed treatment listed below rejects Bouie's suggestion that due process incorporates every prohibition of the Ex Post Facto Clause for judicial decisions. Bouie's holding against retroactive, unforeseeable criminal-law enlargement remains the governing fair-warning rule. Later opinions applying that rule to foreseeable interpretations, unchanged criminal liability, or nonjudicial administrative orders did not themselves narrow Bouie.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

1,779 later cases cite Bouie v. City of Columbia; 74 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Bouie v. City of Columbia?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Limited

  • The Supreme Court confined Bouie to its fair-warning holding and characterized its broader suggestion that judicial decisions are subject to every specific ex post facto prohibition as dicta.

    Rogers v. Tennessee · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    ... To the extent petitioner argues that the Due Process Clause incorporates the specific prohibitions of the Ex Post Facto Clause as identified in Calder, petitioner misreads Bouie. This language, however, was dicta. Our decision in Bouie was rooted firmly in well established notions of due process.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Bouie v. City of Columbia and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace