Defunis vs.

Odegard
416 US 312

Facts: After being denied admission to a state-operated law school, petitioner brought this suit
on behalf of himself alone for injunctive relief, claiming that the school's admissions policy
racially discriminated against him in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth
Amendment. The trial court agreed and ordered the school to admit him in the fall of 1971. The
Washington Supreme Court reversed, holding that the school's admissions policy was not
unconstitutional. Mr. Justice Douglas, as Circuit Justice, stayed that judgment pending this
Court's final disposition of the case, with the result that petitioner was in his final school year
when this Court considered his petition for certiorari. After oral argument, the Court was
informed that petitioner had registered for his final quarter. Respondents have assured the
Court that this registration is fully effective regardless of the ultimate disposition of the case.

Issue:
1. Whether or not the controversy constitute an actual controversy. If not, will it fall to
mootness?
2. Is the case an automatic exception to judicial review?

Held: Because petitioner will complete law school at the end of the term for which he has
registered regardless of any decision this Court might reach on the merits, the Court cannot,
consistently with the limitations of Art. III of the Constitution, consider the substantive
constitutional issues, and the case is moot.

1. The petition is dismissed due to mootness. Mootness here does not depend upon a
"voluntary cessation" of the school's admissions practices, but upon the simple fact that
petitioner is in his final term, and the school's fixed policy to permit him to complete the
term;

2. Given that the case is not an actual case or controversy, upon checking with the
requisites of exception to moot and academic, the case presents no question that is
"capable of repetition, yet evading review," since petitioner will never again have to go
through the school's admissions process, and since it does not follow that the issue
petitioner raises will in the future evade review merely because this case did not reach
the Court until the eve of petitioner's graduation. Thus, it is legally just to dismiss the
case due to mootness.