The definitions in our glossary are primarily sourced from Nolo’s Plain-English Law Dictionary and Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute. We have made slight modifications where needed for brevity and to better tailor the definitions to the specific needs of users of this website. For more detailed explanations of the terms, users are encouraged to review the definitions on these websites or conduct their own independent research.
CASE NAME
Do No Harm v. Lee
Overview
Plaintiff challenges a Tennessee law requiring the Governor, when making appointments to the Board of Podiatric Medical Examiners, to “strive to ensure . . . that at least one person serving on the board is a member of a racial minority.”
Details
The Governor asked the court to dismiss the case, arguing that Plaintiff lacked standing because they brought the case too early and hadn't shown that any specific person was harmed by the law. The court dismissed the case, agreeing with Defendant's argument that the Plaintiff did not meet the burden of establishing standing.
Plaintiff appealed, asking the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals to review the district court's decision to dismiss the case.
Court
U.S. District Court, Middle District of Tennessee
Status
Filed November 08, 2023 | Appealed
Relevant Law
Equal Protection ClauseTopic
Government programsLitigation History
Significance
This case is an example of the far-reaching impact of the Supreme Court's Students For Fair Admissions v. Harvard (2023) decision, as plaintiffs are challenging many race-conscious requirements in the public sector.