Case Citation
Legal Case Name

AMBACH v. NORWICK Case Brief

Supreme Court of United States1979
441 U.S. 68 99 S.Ct. 1589 60 L.Ed.2d 49

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
3 min read

tl;dr: The Supreme Court upheld a New York law preventing resident aliens from becoming public school teachers if they were eligible for U.S. citizenship but refused to seek it. The Court ruled that teaching is a core “governmental function,” so the citizenship requirement only needed to pass rational basis review.

Legal Significance: This case established that public school teaching falls within the “governmental function” exception to strict scrutiny for alienage classifications. It allows states to require citizenship for teachers under the more lenient rational basis standard of equal protection review.

AMBACH v. NORWICK Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

New York Education Law § 3001(3) prohibited the certification of any person as a public school teacher who was not a U.S. citizen, unless that person had manifested an intention to apply for citizenship. Appellees Norwick and Dachinger were permanent resident aliens from Great Britain and Finland, respectively, and were married to U.S. citizens. Both met all educational and other requirements for teaching certification in New York. However, both were eligible to become U.S. citizens but had consistently refused to apply for naturalization. Consequently, their applications for teaching certificates were denied solely because of their failure to meet the citizenship requirement under § 3001(3). They filed suit, alleging the statute violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. A federal District Court, applying strict scrutiny, found the law unconstitutional. The state appealed to the Supreme Court.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does a state law that denies public school teaching certification to otherwise qualified resident aliens who are eligible for but refuse to seek United States citizenship violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?

No. The New York statute does not violate the Equal Protection Clause. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo c

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does a state law that denies public school teaching certification to otherwise qualified resident aliens who are eligible for but refuse to seek United States citizenship violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?

Conclusion

Ambach v. Norwick significantly expanded the "governmental function" exception to strict scrutiny Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud e

Legal Rule

While state classifications based on alienage are generally subject to strict scrutiny Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur s

Legal Analysis

The Court began by acknowledging the general principle from *Graham v. Richardson* Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • States may require public school teachers to be U.S. citizens or
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in vo

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

It is better to risk saving a guilty man than to condemn an innocent one.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+