opinion: YOUNGER, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA, et al. v. GILMORE et al.
  No. 70-9.
  Argued October 14, 1971
  Decided November 8, 1971
  George R. Nock, Deputy Attorney General of California, argued the cause for appellants. With him on the briefs were Evelle J. Younger, Attorney General, pro se, Albert W. Harris, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, and Robert R. Granucd, Deputy Attorney General.
  John Eshleman Wahl, by appointment of the Court, post, p'. 814, argued the cause for appellees. With him on the brief was Marshall W. Krause.
  Jack Greenberg, James M. Nabrit III, Charles Stephen Ralston, Stanley A. Bass, Anthony G. Amsterdam, William Bennett Turner, and Alice Daniel filed a brief for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., et al. as amici curiae urging affirmance.
  Per Curiam.
  On this appeal we postponed the question of jurisdiction pending the hearing of the case on the merits. 401 U. S. 906 (1971).
  Having heard the case on its merits, we find that this Court does have jurisdiction (Alabama Teachers v. Alabama Public School and College Authority, 393 U. S. 400 (1969)) and affirm the judgment of the District Court for the Northern District of California. Johnson v. Avery, 393 U. S. 483 (1969).
instruction: What follows is an opinion from the Supreme Court of the United States. Your task is to identify the type of decision made by the court among the following: Consider "opinion of the court (orally argued)" if the court decided the case by a signed opinion and the case was orally argued. For the 1791-1945 terms, the case need not be orally argued, but a justice must be listed as delivering the opinion of the Court. Consider "per curiam (no oral argument)" if the court decided the case with an opinion but without hearing oral arguments. For the 1791-1945 terms, the Court (or reporter) need not use the term "per curiam" but rather "The Court [said],""By the Court," or "By direction of the Court." Consider "decrees" in the infrequent type of decisions where the justices will typically appoint a special master to take testimony and render a report, the bulk of which generally becomes the Court's decision. This type of decision usually arises under the Court's original jurisdiction and involves state boundary disputes. Consider "equally divided vote" for cases decided by an equally divided vote, for example when a justice fails to participate in a case or when the Court has a vacancy. Consider "per curiam (orally argued)" if no individual justice's name appears as author of the Court's opinion and the case was orally argued. Consider "judgment of the Court (orally argued)" for formally decided cases (decided the case by a signed opinion) where less than a majority of the participating justices agree with the opinion produced by the justice assigned to write the Court's opinion.