AND · 42usc1983:dc-statute-inclusion
Added by Pub. L. 96-170 (1979) to overturn District of Columbia v. Carter (409 U.S. 418 (1973)) and bring D.C. officials within § 1983.
Exact element source
For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.Source:
docroot/ir/usc/title42.jsonl#title42_sec1983; Unicode character offsets [764:933] (end exclusive); SHA-256 88fe01322b9d94860a669ec452f558146e2745845070bc43583671ce12acb2bb.Routes and case patterns
No routes recorded for this element.
How courts decided this element
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Pattern | Exact source quotations |
|---|
Court interpretations
interpretation
Because of that intent, we have held that in § 1983 actions the statutory requirement of action “under color of” state law is just as broad as the Fourteenth Amendment’s “state action” requirement.
Hafer v. Melo — 502 U.S. 21 (1991) · Supreme Court of the United States · 1991 (42usc1983: author: Fable · historical QA: PASS (QA1, neov2/qa/cases-QA1.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed)
Because of that intent, we have held that in § 1983 actions the statutory requirement of action “under color of” state law is just as broad as the Fourteenth Amendment’s “state action” requirement.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/us_502.jsonl#/us/502/0021-01; Unicode character offsets [10623:10820] (end exclusive); SHA-256 b981c1cb2a9bf4bab619f49a26674002633c907c86f39bd53f955befb5605c07.Added by Pub. L. 96-170 (1979) to overturn District of Columbia v. Carter (409 U.S. 418 (1973)) and bring D.C. officials within § 1983.