the three-judge district court held that the state could require a bar applicant to express an intent to be a resident of the state at the time of admission without penalizing the right of interstate travel and without contravening equal protection interests
How later courts described this case
- the three-judge district court held that the state could require a bar applicant to express an intent to be a resident of the state at the time of admission without penalizing the right of interstate travel and without contravening equal protection interests
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
BRUCE R. THOMPSON, District Judge
(concurring):
In the absence of controlling precedent, I would disagree with section III of the opinion dealing with the residency requirement.. I am thoroughly in agreement with Justice Douglas’ dissenting opinion in Martin v. Walton, 368 U.S. 25 , 82 S.Ct. 1 , 7 L.Ed.2d 5 (1961). That case is, in my view, not distinguishable from the present case and the majority rules.