You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reasons:

This IP address has been blocked from editing Wikipedia.
This does not affect your ability to read Wikipedia pages.
Most people who see this message have done nothing wrong. Some kinds of blocks restrict editing from specific service providers or telecom companies in response to recent abuse or vandalism, and can sometimes affect other users who are unrelated to that abuse. Review the information below for assistance if you do not believe that you have done anything wrong.

The IP address or range 44.201.0.0/16 has been blocked (disabled) by ‪ST47‬ for the following reason(s):

The IP address that you are currently using has been blocked because it is believed to be a web host provider. To prevent abuse, web hosts may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.
You will not be able to edit Wikipedia using a web host provider because it hides your IP address, much like a proxy or VPN.
We recommend that you attempt to use another connection to edit. For example, if you use a proxy or VPN to connect to the internet, turn it off when editing Wikipedia. If you edit using a mobile connection, try using a Wi-Fi connection, and vice versa. If you are using a corporate internet connection, switch to a different Wi-Fi network. If you have a Wikipedia account, please log in.
If you do not have any other way to edit Wikipedia, you will need to request an IP block exemption.

How to appeal if you are confident that your connection does not use a web host's IP address:
If you are confident that you are not using a web host, you may appeal this block by adding the following text on your talk page: ((unblock|reason=Caught by a web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is _______. Place any further information here. ~~~~)). You must fill in the blank with your IP address for this block to be investigated. Your IP address can be determined here. Alternatively, if you wish to keep your IP address private you can use the unblock ticket request system. There are several reasons you might be editing using the IP address of a web host (such as if you are using VPN software or a business network); please use this method of appeal only if you think your IP address is in fact not a web host.

Administrators: The IP block exemption user right should only be applied to allow users to edit using web host in exceptional circumstances, and they should usually be directed to the functionaries team via email. If you intend to give the IPBE user right, a CheckUser needs to take a look at the account. This can be requested most easily at SPI Quick Checkuser Requests. Unblocking an IP or IP range with this template is highly discouraged without at least contacting the blocking administrator.

This block will expire on 23:54, 31 July 2024.

Even when blocked, you will usually still be able to edit your user talk page, as well as email administrators and other editors.

For information on how to proceed, please read the FAQ for blocked users and the guideline on block appeals. The guide to appealing blocks may also be helpful.

Other useful links: Blocking policy · Help:I have been blocked
Your IP address is in a range that has been blocked on all Wikimedia Foundation wikis. The block was made by ‪AntiCompositeNumber‬. The reason given is Open proxy/Webhost: Visit the FAQ if you are affected .
- Start of block: 13:55, 18 August 2022
- Expiry of block: 13:55, 18 April 2025
Your current IP address is 44.201.28.123. The blocked range is 44.201.0.0/16. Please include all above details in any queries you make. If you believe you were blocked by mistake, you can find additional information and instructions in the No open proxies global policy. Otherwise, to discuss the block please post a request for review on Meta-Wiki. You could also send an email to the stewards VRT queue at stewards@wikimedia.org including all above details.

You can view and copy the source of this page:

((Use mdy dates|date=September 2023))
((More citations needed|date=August 2021))
((Infobox SCOTUS case
  |Litigants=Strauder v. West Virginia
  |ArgueDateA=October 20
  |ArgueDateB=21
  |ArgueYear=1879
  |DecideDate=March 1
  |DecideYear=1880
  |FullName=Strauder v. West Virginia
  |USVol=100
  |USPage=303
  |ParallelCitations=25 [[L. Ed.]] 664; 1879 [[U.S. LEXIS]] 1830 
  |Prior=''State v. Strauder'', 8 W. Va. 686 (1874), verdict and sentence rev'd on state law grounds; ''State v. Strauder'', 11 W. Va. 745 (1877), verdict and sentence aff'd on constitutional grounds
  |Subsequent=
  |Holding=((ordered list|item_style=padding-left: 0; margin-left:-1.5em|A state law that excludes citizens from jury service on account of race or color is a denial of the equal protection of the law; and|It is within Congress's power under Section&nbsp;5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to provide for the removal to federal court those cases arising under state law where that state's law denies a party the equal protection of their rights.))
  |Majority=Strong
  |JoinMajority=Waite, Swayne, Miller, Bradley, Hunt, Harlan
  |Concurrence=
  |JoinConcurrence=
  |Dissent=Field
  |JoinDissent=Clifford
  |LawsApplied=[[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|U.S. Const. amend. XIV]], [[Civil Rights Act of 1866]]
))

'''''Strauder v. West Virginia''''', 100 U.S. 303 (1880), was a [[List of landmark court decisions in the United States|landmark decision]] of the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] about [[racial discrimination]] and [[United States constitutional criminal procedure]].<ref>((ussc|name=Strauder v. West Virginia|volume=100|page=303|year=1880)).</ref> ''Strauder'' was the first instance where the Supreme Court reversed a [[U.S. state|state]] court decision denying a [[defendant]]'s [[Motion (legal)|motion]] to remove his [[Criminal procedure|criminal]] [[trial]] to federal court pursuant to Section 3 of the [[Civil Rights Act of 1866]].<ref>((cite journal |first=Michael J. |last=Klarman |title=The Racial Origins of Modern Criminal Procedure |volume=99 |journal=[[Michigan Law Review]] |issue=1 |pages=48–97 |year=2000 |doi=10.2307/1290325 |jstor=1290325 |url=https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol99/iss1/3 ))</ref>

Its [[Holding (law)|holding]], along with those of its [[companion case]]s of ''Virginia v. Rives'' (1880) and ''Ex parte Virginia'' (1880) established the proposition that it is a denial to criminal defendants of the [[Equal Protection Clause|equal protection]] of the law for a state to exclude persons from service on a [[Grand juries in the United States|grand]] or [[petit jury]] on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. These holdings ''do not'' guarantee criminal defendants that the grand or petit juries involved in their case will be composed either in full or in part of members of a non-white defendant's race (as was sought in the ''Rives'' case), but held instead that equal protection demands only that potential jurors could not be excluded from jury service on account of their race. Additionally, the Supreme Court did not exercise its power of [[judicial review]] to strike down West Virginia's juror qualifications statute as unconstitutional, as Strauder and his attorneys did not seek such a remedy. Instead, Strauder desired his case be removed to federal court, where he expected he could receive a ''[[Jury selection|venire]]'' that included freedmen.

In ''Strauder'' and the companion cases, the Supreme Court also issued a narrow interpretation of the removal provision of the [[Civil Rights Act of 1866]]. For a case to be removed to federal court, the denial of rights must occur in the constitution or laws of the state, or in other pre-trial actions of state officials, that state courts are without power to [[Legal remedy|remedy]]—that is, it held that the Civil Rights Act required removal be based on objectively discernible facts about the denial of rights (such as the exclusion of freedmen from the jury pool by Judge Coles in ''Ex parte Virginia'', despite Virginia law allowing freedmen to serve as jurors, an act in violation of the [[Civil Rights Act of 1875]]), and not the defendant's subjective beliefs about potential outcomes of a state-administered trial. The Supreme Court provided that the remedy for denials of equal protection occurring during trial can be found in the [[Appellate procedure in the United States|appeals process]]; only those cases where equal rights cannot be enforced before state judicial bodies are appropriate to be removed to federal court.

==Background==
On the morning of April 18, 1872 in [[Wheeling, West Virginia]], Taylor Strauder, a former slave, allegedly murdered his wife Anna by bludgeoning her to death with two strikes from a hatchet handle to the left side of her head after having argued with her through the night about an allegation of her marital infidelity. Strauder's step-daughter, Fannie Green, supposedly witnessed the murder, and alleged that Strauder threatened Green to remain quiet, lest she too be killed. Strauder allegedly fled and was arrested in [[Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania]] on April 25, 1872.

==Procedural history==
Following the passage and ratification of the [[Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Thirteenth Amendment]] in 1865, Congress passed the [[Civil Rights Act of 1866]]. Under section 3 of the act, Congress provided to defendants in state trials the right to remove to federal court "all causes, civil or criminal," arising under state or municipal laws wherein "any of the rights secured to [the defendant] by the first section of this act" were denied or could not be enforced. Later fearing that the Thirteenth Amendment might not provide a sufficient legal basis for the Civil Rights Act, Congress passed and the states ratified the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment]]. Congress then passed the act of May 31, 1870, of which section 18 reenacted the Civil Rights Act of 1866. Moreover, section 16 of the 1870 act also provided that "all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory in the United States... to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property as is enjoyed by white citizens[.]"

===First trial===
Upon his return to Wheeling, Strauder appeared before the circuit court for [[Ohio County, West Virginia]] and received a [[probable cause hearing|preliminary examination]] before Judge [[Thayer Melvin]]. The court assigned George O. Davenport and [[Blackburn B. Dovener]] as Strauder's counsel, and set his [[arraignment]] for the May 1872 term of the circuit court. On May 20, 1872 the grand jury returned an indictment for murder in the first degree. Strauder [[demurrer|demurred]] the indictment as defective, arguing the facts alleged did not rise to murder in the first degree, and that the panel from which the grand jury was selected excluded non-whites; the court overruled the arguments. Counsel for Strauder then attempted to remove the case to the U.S. district court for West Virginia, but this too was overruled. Strauder then pleaded not guilty by reason of [[temporary insanity]] and asked the court for a continuance to the October term, which was granted. At the next term, Strauder received a second continuance to the May 1873 term.

During the first continuance, the State of West Virginia adopted a new state constitution in August 1872. The state legislature reconstructed the state courts and passed a criminal procedure bill on April 3, 1873 providing criminal defendants with preliminary examinations to occur at the county court (as distinguished from the circuit court for the county). At the May 1873 term of the circuit court, Strauder made a motion requesting this examination before the county court. The circuit court denied the motion, citing the preliminary examination the circuit court had already given. The case then proceeded to trial over May 6–8, 1873; the jury returned a verdict of guilty after approximately 90 minutes of deliberations. The court sentenced Strauder to death by hanging on July 8, 1873.

===First appeal===
On [[appeal]], the [[Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia]] held on July 20, 1874 that, since Strauder's case had not yet commenced trial at the time of the passage of the April 3, 1873 statute providing for a preliminary examination before trial, Strauder's case was within the scope of the statute. Since Strauder had timely made the request for the examination, the ruling of the circuit court denying the examination by the county court on grounds that the statute wasn't applicable to the case was reversed. "The error of the circuit court in refusing the accused an examination before the county court of the county of Ohio upon said charge of murder, is fatal to all the other proceedings in the cause by which the accused was tried, convicted and sentenced to be hung..." Consequently, the supreme court reversed the circuit court's denial of the request for the preliminary examination, overruled and nulled all rulings made in the case after that point, set aside the verdict, and remanded the case with instructions that the preliminary examination take place in the county court in accordance with the law.

===Second trial===
The clerk of the circuit court certified the case to the county court, which completed its preliminary examination on September 9, 1874 and remanded Strauder to the circuit court for trial. A grand jury convened and on October 20, 1874 returned an indictment similar to that of May 20, 1872. Strauder's arraignment on the new indictment took place on November 2, 1874.

At the arraignment, Strauder and his counsel moved to [[quash]] the new indictment and to remove the case to federal court on grounds that West Virginia law precluded non-white citizens from grand and petit jury service. During the course of the first trial, an act regarding trial procedure had passed as part of the 1873 reconstruction of the West Virginia courts in consequence of the new state constitution; the act of March 12, 1873 provided "[a]ll white male persons, who are twenty-one years of age and not over sixty, and who are citizens of this State, shall be liable to serve as jurors, except as herein provided." The only exception provided regarded service as a state official. The judge denied both motions. Strauder then demurred each count contained in the indictment and was again overruled. At that point, Strauder pleaded not guilty to the indictment, and the trial proceeded to jury selection, which resulted in an [[all-white jury]]. Strauder's counsel raised an objection to the composition of this jury was entered, but the court overruled the objection. The trial continued through November 4 when the case went to the jury for deliberations. On November 5, the jury returned a verdict of guilty and a sentence of death. Strauder and his counsel moved for a new trial on grounds of an impartial juror and that the jury contained no jurors of Strauder's race, for which arguments were heard January 5, 1875. The court denied the motion, and proceeded to sentence Strauder to death by hanging on January 9, 1875.

===Second appeal===
Arguments before the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia took place June 27, 1876. Strauder's counsel raised 11 points of exception. The supreme court handed down its ruling on November 17, 1877, relying on the opinions of the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] in ''[[Slaughter-House Cases|The Slaughter-House Cases]]'' and ''[[Bradwell v. Illinois]]'' to find the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment]] had not been "intended to protect the citizens of any State against unjust legislation by their own State."  The Supreme Court consequently affirmed the trial court's denial of the motion to remove of the case to federal court as correct. Strauder's case was then sent back to the Circuit Court of Ohio County for resentencing, but held over until the April 1878 term.

While awaiting resentencing, Strauder and his counsel appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. On April 15, 1878, [[Chief Justice of the United States|Chief Justice]] [[Morrison Waite]] granted a [[writ of error]]. The case was set for argument in the October 1879 term, and oral arguments were heard over October 20–21, 1879 along with the companion cases of ''Virginia v. Rives'' and ''Ex parte Virginia''. Assisting Strauder's counsel in the arguments before the Supreme Court were [[United States Attorney General|U.S. Attorney General]] [[Charles Devens]] and former justice of the [[Supreme Court of Virginia]] [[Westel Willoughby]]. Arguing for the State of West Virginia were [[List of attorneys general of West Virginia|West Virginia Attorney General]] [[Robert White (attorney general)|Robert White]] and special counsel James W. Green, a Virginia lawyer.

==Decision==
The majority opinion, written by Justice [[William Strong (Pennsylvania judge)|William Strong]], focused on two legal questions:
# Does the Constitution of the United States afford citizens of the United States a right to trial by a jury selected and empaneled without discrimination against prospective jurors on account of a juror's race or color?
# If such a right exists and is denied by the state, may the case be removed to federal court pursuant to Congress's power of enforcement under the Fourteenth Amendment?

The majority held that categorical exclusion of blacks from juries for no other reason than their race violated the Equal Protection Clause since the very purpose of the Clause was "to assure to the colored race the enjoyment of all the civil rights that under the law are enjoyed by white persons, and to give to that race the protection of the general government, in that enjoyment, whenever it should be denied by the States." The Court did not say that a law barring blacks from juries violated the rights of potential jury members, but that such an exclusion violated the rights of black criminal defendants since juries would be "drawn from a panel from which the State has expressly excluded every man of [a defendant's] race."

However, the Court did not strike down West Virginia's law respecting juror qualifications as unconstitutional, as Strauder had not challenged the law on that ground. Instead, it proceeded with an analysis of whether the denial of equal protection of the law confronting Strauder was of a nature sufficient to motivate an exercise of Congressional authority under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to enact federal legislation allowing for the removal of cases such as Strauder's to the local federal district court, presumably where the trial process, under the supervision of a federal judge, would enforce the defendant's rights against the state.

===Dissent===
The two dissenting justices, [[Stephen J. Field|Field]] and [[Nathan Clifford|Clifford]], explained their position in the case of ''Ex Parte Virginia'', decided the same day.<ref name=VA>((ussc|name=Ex Parte Virginia|link=|volume=100|page=339|pin=|year=1879)).</ref>  In the latter case, Field wrote, with Clifford joining, "The equality of the protection secured extends only to civil rights, as distinguished from those which are political or arise from the form of the government and its mode of administration."<ref name=VA />

==Subsequent case history==
The Supreme Court of the United States on July 9, 1880 remanded the case to the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia, and ordered that the court reverse the decision of the circuit court and remand the case for further proceedings. By August 17, 1880, the Supreme Court of Appeals had done as ordered, setting aside the verdict and sentence of the second trial, and reversing the ruling of the circuit court that had denied to Strauder the removal of the case to federal court. The orders of the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of Appeals were entered into the circuit court record on Saturday, August 21, 1880 and the case was ordered to be removed to the U.S. district court.

===Federal court===
On Monday, September 6, 1880, the sheriff of Ohio County was served with a [[writ of habeas corpus|writ]] of ''[[Habeas corpus in the United States|habeas corpus]]'' to produce Strauder before the U.S. district court the next day and to [[show cause]] why he was being held. Over the next two days, before Judge [[John Jay Jackson Jr.]], arguments were heard over why the writ should be quashed, the state seeking to maintain its custody of Strauder. Arguments were also heard whether Strauder should be released pending the next hearings, or bail set. On Thursday, September 9, the court denied the state's motion to quash the writ, ordered custody of Strauder be transferred to the U.S. Marshal, and that a bail hearing for Strauder be scheduled. By October 9, Judge Jackson denied both discharge and bail.

The case was next heard on Thursday, January 13, 1881, whereupon Strauder entered a plea of abatement to defeat the 1874 indictment on the grounds that it too suffered from the constitutional deficiency passed upon by the Supreme Court—that is, the ''venire'' from which the grand jury had been drawn in May 1874, subject to the same 1873 jury law, excluded non-whites as jurors. On Saturday, April 30, 1881, Judge Jackson ruled in favor of Strauder, quashing the 1874 indictment and discharging Strauder from federal custody.

===Rearrest===
Anticipating that the federal court would discharge Strauder, the Wheeling Chief of Police Henry Conant swore out in secret a new warrant for Strauder's arrest before [[Aquilla B. Caldwell]] of the First Judicial Circuit on April 7, 1881. When the federal court then in fact discharged Strauder, Conant immediately moved to rearrest Strauder in the courtroom; Judge Jackson objected, causing Conant to withdraw. Conant instead rearrested Strauder upon his leaving the federal courthouse, and both returned to Wheeling on May 2. The next day, arguments were heard before Judge Caldwell regarding the circuit court's jurisdiction. Strauder and his counsel argued that even though the U.S. district court had discharged Strauder, it had only done so on the 1874 indictment, and since the state's prosecutor had never made a declaration of ''[[nolle prosequi]]'' or otherwise dismissed the 1872 indictment, and since the entire case had been certified to the federal district court, both the 1872 and 1874 indictments were under the federal court's jurisdiction when the April 7 warrant had issued. Further, since the 1872 indictment was still pending before the federal court, it still had jurisdiction over the case. As such, argued Strauder, the state circuit court had no jurisdiction, rendering its warrant invalid. Judge Caldwell ultimately agreed that the 1872 indictment was still alive and before the federal court, and ordered Strauder discharged from state custody, finally freeing Strauder from his nine-years confinement.

==Impact==
While a victory for the rights of black defendants and an important early civil rights case, dicta from ''Strauder v. West Virginia'' implies the right of states to bar women or other classes from juries by holding, in the words of Justice Strong, that a state "may confine the selection to males, to freeholders, to citizens, to persons within certain ages, or to persons having educational qualifications. We do not believe the Fourteenth Amendment was ever intended to prohibit this.... Its aim was against discrimination because of race or color."<ref>((cite book |last=Kerber |first=Linda |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=YAIo1k6SSKcC&pg=PA133 |title=No Constitutional Right to Be Ladies: Women and the Obligations of Citizenship |page=133 |publisher=Macmillan |year=1999 |via=[[Google Books]] |isbn=978-0-8090-7384-9 ))</ref> The precedent set by ''Strauder'' has continued to influence rulings in cases as late as 1961 in ''[[Hoyt v. Florida]]''.<ref>368 U.S. 57 (1961).</ref>

Because it was not raised in the context of ''Strauder'', the Court also did not consider in its analysis whether state actions that have a [[disparate impact]] upon African-Americans would violate the Equal Protection Clause; that question was not considered until almost a century later in ''[[Washington v. Davis]]'', which reaffirmed that ''Strauder'' "established that the exclusion of [African-Americans] from grand and petit juries in criminal proceedings violated the Equal Protection Clause, but the fact that a particular jury or a series of juries does not statistically reflect the racial composition of the community does not, in itself, make out an invidious discrimination forbidden by the Clause." ((ussc|246|229|1976)).

==See also==
* ''[[Batson v. Kentucky]]''

==References==
((Reflist))

==Further reading==
*((cite journal |last=Cresswell |first=Stephen |year=1983 |title=The Case of Taylor Strauder |journal=Journal of West Virginia History |volume=44 |issue=3 |pages=193–211 |url=http://www.wvculture.org/history/journal_wvh/wvh44-3.html |access-date=March 7, 2020 ))
*((cite journal |last=De Cani |first=John S. |year=1974 |title=Statistical Evidence in Jury Discrimination Cases |journal=Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology |volume=65 |issue=2 |pages=234&ndash;238 |doi=10.2307/1142542 |jstor= 1142542|url=https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5898&context=jclc ))
*((cite journal |last=Gillespie |first=J. R. |year=1950 |title=The Constitution and the All-White Jury |journal=Kentucky Law Journal |volume=39 |pages=65 |issn=0023-026X ))
*((cite journal |last=Schmidt |first=Benno C. Jr. |year=1983 |title=Juries, Jurisdiction, and Race Discrimination: The Lost Promise of ''Strauder v. West Virginia'' |journal=Texas Law Review |volume=61 |issue=8 |pages=1401 |issn=0040-4411 |url=http://www.utexas.edu/law/journals/tlr/abstracts/Volume%2061/Schmidt.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20031223201947/http://www.utexas.edu/law/journals/tlr/abstracts/Volume%2061/Schmidt.htm |archive-date=2003-12-23 ))
* ((cite journal |title=Basic Equal Protection Analysis |url=https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1787&context=lawreview |first=Russell W. |last=Galloway Jr. |journal=Santa Clara Law Review |volume=29 |number=1 |year=1989 |access-date=February 8, 2021))

==External links==
* ((Wikisource-inline))
* ((caselaw source|case=''Strauder v. West Virginia'', ((ussc|100|303|1880|el=no))|courtlistener=https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/90039/strauder-v-west-virginia/|googlescholar=https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10979220518323133653|justia=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/100/303/|openjurist=https://openjurist.org/100/us/303|loc=http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep100/usrep100303/usrep100303.pdf))

((Equal protection and criminal procedure|jury|state=expanded))

[[Category:United States equal protection and criminal procedure case law]]
[[Category:United States jury case law]]
[[Category:United States Supreme Court cases]]
[[Category:United States Supreme Court cases of the Waite Court]]
[[Category:1880 in United States case law]]
[[Category:African-American history of West Virginia]]
[[Category:Legal history of West Virginia]]
[[Category:1880 in West Virginia]]
[[Category:Criminal cases in the Waite Court]]
[[Category:African-American history between emancipation and the civil rights movement]]
[[Category:Ohio County, West Virginia]]
[[Category:Race-related case law in the United States]]
[[Category:United States racial discrimination case law]]

Pages transcluded onto the current version of this page (help):

Strauder v. West Virginia (edit)
Template:Ambox (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Caselaw source (view source) (extended confirmed protected)
Template:Cite book (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite journal (view source) (protected)
Template:DMCA (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Dated maintenance category (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Dated maintenance category (articles) (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Equal protection and criminal procedure (edit)
Template:FULLROOTPAGENAME (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Find sources mainspace (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Hlist/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Template:If between (view source) (extended confirmed protected)
Template:Infobox (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Infobox SCOTUS case (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Infobox US Supreme Court case (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Infobox US Supreme Court case/courts (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Main other (view source) (protected)
Template:More citations needed (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Navbox (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Navbox with collapsible groups (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Ns has subpages (view source) (protected)
Template:Ordered list (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Pagetype (view source) (protected)
Template:Reflist (view source) (protected)
Template:Reflist/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Template:SDcat (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Short description (view source) (protected)
Template:Short description/lowercasecheck (view source) (protected)
Template:Sister-inline (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Spaces (view source) (protected)
Template:Template other (view source) (protected)
Template:Tomorrow (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Use mdy dates (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Ussc (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Wikisource-inline (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:· (view source) (protected)
Module:Arguments (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/blacklist (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/config (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/data (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/shared (view source) (protected)
Module:Check for unknown parameters (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1 (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/COinS (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Date validation (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Utilities (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Whitelist (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Module:Disambiguation (view source) (protected)
Module:Disambiguation/templates (view source) (protected)
Module:Find sources (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Find sources/config (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Find sources/links (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Find sources/templates/Find sources mainspace (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Infobox (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Infobox/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Italic title (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:List (view source) (protected)
Module:Message box (view source) (protected)
Module:Message box/ambox.css (view source) (protected)
Module:Message box/configuration (view source) (protected)
Module:Namespace detect/config (view source) (protected)
Module:Namespace detect/data (view source) (protected)
Module:Navbar (view source) (protected)
Module:Navbar/configuration (view source) (protected)
Module:Navbar/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Module:Navbox (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Navbox/configuration (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Navbox/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Navbox with collapsible groups (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Ns has subpages (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Pagetype (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype/config (view source) (protected)
Module:Redirect (view source) (protected)
Module:SDcat (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:String (view source) (protected)
Module:TableTools (view source) (protected)
Module:Unsubst (view source) (protected)
Module:Yesno (view source) (protected)

Return to Strauder v. West Virginia.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauder_v._West_Virginia"