2012/2013 TERM
Last week, the Court issued three opinions and granted review to one new case. Click on any case below to learn more.
Bowman v. Monsanto Co. - Patent exhaustion does not permit a farmer to reproduce patented seeds through planting and harvesting without the patent holder’s permission. (9-0) (Fed. Cir. Affirmed)
Bullock v. BankChampaign - The term “defalcation” in the Bankruptcy Code includes a culpable state of mind requirement involving knowledge of, or gross recklessness in respect to, the improper nature of the fiduciary behavior. (9-0) (11th Cir. Vacated & Remanded)
Dan's City Used Cars, Inc. v. Pelkey - Section 14501(c)(1) of the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994, which preempts state laws “related to a price, route, or service of any motor carrier . . . with respect to the transportation of property,” does not preempt state-law claims stemming from the storage and disposal of a towed vehicle. (9-0) (Sup. Ct. NH Affirmed)
Burnside v. Walters - Whether the Sixth Circuit erred in holding that the in forma pauperis statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), prohibits indigent plaintiffs from amending their complaints.
Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer fractures shoulder in biking accident in D.C. (view article)
What's the Most Important Supreme Court Case No One's Ever Heard Of? (view article)
Justice Department appeals recess appointments ruling to Supreme Court (view article)
Supreme Court watchers keeping an eye on Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s possible retirement (view article)
Decided May 13, 2013
ISSUE: Patent Exhaustion
HOLDING:
Patent exhaustion does not permit a farmer to reproduce patented seeds through planting and harvesting without the patent holder’s permission.
Decided May 13, 2013
ISSUE: Defalcation in Bankruptcy
HOLDING:
The term “defalcation” in the Bankruptcy Code includes a culpable state of mind requirement involving knowledge of, or gross recklessness in respect to, the improper n...
Decided May 13, 2013
ISSUE: Federal Preemption
HOLDING:
Section 14501(c)(1) of the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994, which preempts state laws “related to a price, route, or service of any motor carrier ....
Decided April 29, 2013
ISSUE: Right to Public Records for Out-of-State Citizens
HOLDING:
Virginia’s FOIA does not violate the Privileges and Immunities Clause, which protects only those privileges and immunities that are “fundamental.” Virginia&rsquo...
Decided April 29, 2013
ISSUE: Failure to Speedily Provide Indigent Counsel
HOLDING:
The writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted.
Decided April 23, 2013
ISSUE: Aggravated Felony Deportation
HOLDING:
If a noncitizen’s conviction for a marijuana distribution offense fails to establish that the offense involved either remuneration or more than a small amount of marijuana, ...
Decided April 17, 2013
ISSUE: Corporate Liability Under Alien Tort Statute
HOLDING:
The presumption against extraterritoriality applies to claims under the ATS, and nothing in the statute rebuts that presumption.
Decided April 17, 2013
ISSUE: Warrantless Blood Sample
HOLDING:
The judgment is affirmed. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, II–A, II–B, and IV, concluding that in drunk-driving investigat...
Decided April 16, 2013
ISSUE: Mootness After Settlement Offer
HOLDING:
While the Courts of Appeals disagree whether an unaccepted Rule 68 offer that fully satisfies a plaintiff’s individual claim is sufficient to render that claim moot, respond...
Decided April 16, 2013
ISSUE: Employee Benefits Plans
HOLDING:
In a §502(a)(3) action based on an equitable lien by agreement—like this one—the ERISA plan’s terms govern. Neither general unjust enrichment principles nor...
Decided April 01, 2013
ISSUE: Clearly Established Federal Law in State Habeas Case
HOLDING:
Because the Court of Appeals erred in concluding that respondent’s claim is supported by “clearly established Federal law, as deter- mined by the Supreme Court of the ...
Decided March 27, 2013
ISSUE: Sovereign Immunity
HOLDING:
The law enforcement proviso extends to law enforcement officers’ acts or omissions that arise within the scope of their employment, regardless of whether the officers are en...
Decided March 27, 2013
ISSUE: Class Certification
HOLDING:
Respondents’ class action was improperly certified under Rule 23(b)(3).
Decided March 26, 2013
ISSUE: Police Dog Sniff Search
HOLDING:
The investigation of Jardines’ home was a “search” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment.
Decided March 20, 2013
ISSUE: Industrial Stormwater
HOLDING:
The preamendment version of the Industrial Stormwater Rule, as permissibly construed by the agency, exempts discharges of channeled stormwater runoff from logging roads from the N...
Decided March 20, 2013
ISSUE: Federal Preemption
HOLDING:
The federal anti-lien provision preempts North Carolina’s irrebuttable statutory presumption that one-third of a tort recovery is attributable to medical expenses. The law h...
Decided March 19, 2013
ISSUE: First Sale Doctrine
HOLDING:
The “first sale” doctrine applies to copies of a copyrighted work lawfully made abroad.
Decided March 19, 2013
ISSUE: Limiting Damages to Defeat Right of Removal
HOLDING:
Knowles’ stipulation does not defeat federal jurisdiction under CAFA.
Decided March 04, 2013
ISSUE: Waiver of Sovereign Immunity
HOLDING:
The Gonzalez Act direction in §1089(e) abrogates the FTCA’s intentional tort exception and therefore permits Levin’s suit against the United States alleging medic...
Decided February 27, 2013
ISSUE: Fraud on the Market Class Certification
HOLDING:
Proof of materiality is not a prerequisite to certification of a securities-fraud class action seeking money damages for alleged violations of §10(b) and Rule 10b–5.
Decided February 27, 2013
ISSUE: Gov't Penalty Action SOL
HOLDING:
The five-year clock in §2462 begins to tick when the fraud occurs, not when it is discovered.
Decided February 26, 2013
ISSUE: Standing to Challenge Federal Surveillance Law
HOLDING:
Respondents do not have Article III standing. Respondents’ theory of future injury is too speculative to satisfy the well-established requirement that threatened injury must...
Decided February 26, 2013
ISSUE: Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
HOLDING:
Section §1692k(a)(3) is not contrary to, and, thus, does not displace a district court’s discretion to award costs under, Rule 54(d)(1).
Decided February 20, 2013
ISSUE: Padilla Retroactivity
HOLDING:
Padilla does not apply retroactively to cases already final on direct review.
Decided February 20, 2013
ISSUE: Plain Error Review
HOLDING:
Regardless of whether a legal question was settled or unsettled at the time of trial, an error is “plain” within the meaning of Rule 52(b) so long as the error was pla...
Decided February 20, 2013
ISSUE: Right to Retain Biased Juror on Panel
HOLDING:
For purposes of §2254(d), when a state court rules against a defendant in an opinion that rejects some of the defendant’s claims but does not expressly address a federa...
Decided February 20, 2013
ISSUE: Double Jeopardy
HOLDING:
The Double Jeopardy Clause bars retrial for Evans’ offense.
Decided February 20, 2013
ISSUE: Legal Malpractice Claim Jurisdiction
HOLDING:
Section §1338(a) does not deprive the state courts of subject matter jurisdiction over Minton’s malpractice claim.
Decided February 19, 2013
ISSUE: Detention Incident to Search
HOLDING:
The rule in Summers is limited to the immediate vicinity of the premises to be searched and does not apply here, where Bailey was detained at a point beyond any reasonable underst...
Decided February 19, 2013
ISSUE: Drug Dog Alert Probable Cause
HOLDING:
Because training and testing records supported Aldo’s reliability in detecting drugs and Harris failed to undermine that evidence, Wheetley had probable cause to search Harr...
Decided February 19, 2013
ISSUE: State Action Doctrine
HOLDING:
Because Georgia has not clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed a policy allowing hospital authorities to make acquisitions that substantially lessen competition, state-ac...
Decided February 19, 2013
ISSUE: Mootness of International Child Abduction Claim
HOLDING:
The return of a child to a foreign country pursuant to a Convention return order does not render an appeal of that order moot.
Decided January 22, 2013
ISSUE: Equitable Tolling
HOLDING:
The 180-day limitation in §1395oo(a)(3) is not jurisdictional. Unless Congress has clearly stated that a statutory limitation is jurisdictional, the restriction should be tre...
Decided January 15, 2013
ISSUE: Federal Maritime Jurisdiction
HOLDING:
This case is not moot. Lozman’s floating home is not a §3 “vessel.” The Eleventh Circuit found the home “capable of being used . . . as a means of tra...
Decided January 09, 2013
ISSUE: Trademark Covenant Not to Sue
HOLDING:
This case is moot. A defendant claiming that its voluntary compliance moots a case bears the formidable burden of showing that it is absolutely clear the allegedly wrongful behavi...
Decided January 09, 2013
ISSUE: Conspiracy Withdrawal
HOLDING:
A defendant bears the burden of proving a defense of withdrawal from a conspiracy. Although Congress may assign the Government the burden of proving the nonexistence of withdrawal...
Decided January 08, 2013
ISSUE: "Discharge" under Clean Water Act
HOLDING:
The flow of water from an improved portion of a navigable waterway into an unimproved portion of the same waterway does not qualify as a “discharge of a pollutant” und...
Decided January 08, 2013
ISSUE: 18 U.S.C. § 3599(a)(2)
HOLDING:
Federal law does not provide a state prisoner a right to suspension of his federal habeas proceedings when he is adjudged incompetent.
Decided December 10, 2012
ISSUE: Merit Systems Protection Board
HOLDING:
A federal employee who claims that an agency action appealable to the MSPB violates an antidiscrimination statute listed in §7702(a)(1) should seek judicial review in distric...
Decided December 04, 2012
ISSUE: Takings Clause
HOLDING:
Government-induced flooding temporary in duration gains no automatic exemption from Takings Clause inspection. This Court has ruled that government-induced flooding can constitute...
Decided November 26, 2012
ISSUE: Federal Arbitration Act
HOLDING:
State courts rather than federal courts are most frequently called upon to apply the Federal Arbitration Act, including the Act’s national policy favoring arbitration. ...
Decided November 13, 2012
ISSUE: Sovereign Immunity
HOLDING:
The Little Tucker Act does not waive the Government’s sovereign immunity with respect to FCRA damages actions.
Decided November 05, 2012
ISSUE: Permanent Injunction Attorney's Fees
HOLDING:
This case concerns the award of attorney’s fees in a suit alleging unconstitutional conduct by government officials. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circui...
Decided June 28, 2012
ISSUE: Stolen Valor Act
HOLDING:
The judgment of the Ninth Circuit finding the Act invalid under the First Amendment is affirmed. JUSTICE KENNEDY, joined by THE CHIEF JUSTICE, JUSTICE GINSBURG, and JUSTICE SOTOMA...
Decided June 28, 2012
ISSUE: Mandated Healthcare
HOLDING:
The Anti-Injunction Act does not bar this suit. While the individual mandate is not a valid exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Prop...
Decided June 25, 2012
ISSUE: Eighth Amendment
HOLDING:
The Eighth Amendment forbids a sentencing scheme that mandates life in prison without possibility of parole for juvenile homicide offenders.
Decided June 25, 2012
ISSUE: State Immigration Laws
HOLDING:
Sections 3, 5(C), and 6 of S. B. 1070 are preempted by federal law. Section 3 intrudes on the field of alien registration, a field in which Congress has left no room for States to...
Decided June 25, 2012
ISSUE: Campaign Finance
HOLDING:
The question presented in this case is whether the holding of Citizens United applies to the Montana state law. There can be no serious doubt that it does.
Decided June 21, 2012
ISSUE: Apprendi and Criminal Fines
HOLDING:
Where a fine is substantial enough to trigger the Sixth Amendment’s jury trial guarantee, Apprendi applies in full, reserving to juries the determination of any fac...
Decided June 21, 2012
ISSUE: Union Assessments for Political Purposes
HOLDING:
Under the First Amendment, when a union imposes a special assessment or dues increase levied to meet expenses that were not dis- closed when the regular assessment was set, it mus...
Decided June 21, 2012
ISSUE: Fair Sentencing Act of 2010
HOLDING:
The Fair Sentencing Act's new, lower mandatory minimums apply to the post-Act sentencing of pre-Act offenders.
Decided June 21, 2012
ISSUE: FCC Indecency Policy
HOLDING:
Because the Commission failed to give Fox or ABC fair notice prior to the broadcasts in question that fleeting expletives and momentary nudity could be found actionably indecent, ...
Decided June 18, 2012
ISSUE: Confrontation Clause
HOLDING:
The disclosure of Cellmark’s out-of-court statements through Lambatos' expert testimony did not violate the Confrontation Clause.
Decided June 18, 2012
ISSUE: Indian Trust Lands
HOLDING:
The United States has waived its sovereign immunity from Patchak’s action. Patchak has prudential standing to challenge the Secretary’s acquisition.
Decided June 18, 2012
ISSUE: Indian Trust Lands
HOLDING:
The United States has waived its sovereign immunity from Patchak’s action. Patchak has prudential standing to challenge the Secretary’s acquisition.
Decided June 18, 2012
ISSUE: FLSA's Outside Sales Exemption
HOLDING:
Petitioners qualify as outside salesmen under the most reasona- ble interpretation of the DOL’s regulations.
Decided June 18, 2012
ISSUE: Tribal Contract Support Costs
HOLDING:
The Government must pay each Tribe's contract support costs in full.
Decided June 11, 2012
ISSUE: Federal Jurisdiction Under Civil Service Reform Act
HOLDING:
The CSRA precludes district court jurisdiction over petitioners' claims because it is fairly discernible that Congress intended the statute's review scheme to provide the ...
Decided June 11, 2012
ISSUE: AEDPA Case
HOLDING:
Under Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), the Sixth Circuit had no authority to issue the writ of habeas corpus unless the Kentucky Su- preme Court&rsqu...
Decided June 04, 2012
ISSUE: Secret Service Immunity
HOLDING:
Petitioners are entitled to qualified immunity because, at the time of Howards’ arrest, it was not clearly established that an arrest supported by probable cause could give ...
Decided May 29, 2012
ISSUE: Bankruptcy Auctions
HOLDING:
The debtors may not obtain confirmation of a Chapter 11 cramdown plan that provides for the sale of collateral free and clear of the Bank’s lien, but does not permit the Ban...
Decided May 29, 2012
ISSUE: Evidence sufficiency
HOLDING:
Reversed and remanded without argument. Affording due respect to the role of the jury and the state courts, we conclude that the evidence at Johnson's trial was not nearly spa...
Decided May 24, 2012
ISSUE: Unearned fees in real estate
HOLDING:
In order to establish a violation of §2607(b), a plaintiff must demonstrate that a charge for settlement services was divided be- tween two or more persons.
Decided May 24, 2012
ISSUE: Double Jeopardy Clause
HOLDING:
The Double Jeopardy Clause does not bar retrying Blueford on charges of capital murder and first-degree murder.
Decided May 21, 2012
ISSUE: SSA Survivor Benefits
HOLDING:
The SSA's reading is better attuned to the statute’s text and its design to benefit primarily those supported by the deceased wage earner in his or her lifetime. Moreove...
Decided May 21, 2012
ISSUE: Imputed Lawful Permanent Resident Status
HOLDING:
The BIA's rejection of imputation is based on a permissible construction of §1229b(a).
Decided May 21, 2012
ISSUE: Translation Costs
HOLDING:
Because the ordinary meaning of "interpreter" is someone who translates orally from one language to another, the category "compensation of interpreters" in &se...
Decided May 14, 2012
ISSUE: Chapter 12 Bankruptcy
HOLDING:
The federal income tax liability resulting from petitioners' post-petition farm sale is not "incurred by the estate" under §503(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and th...
Decided April 25, 2012
ISSUE: Section 6501(e)(1)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code
HOLDING:
The judgment is affirmed. Section 6501(e)(1)(A) does not apply to an overstatement of basis.
Decided April 24, 2012
ISSUE: Sua Sponte SOL Defense
HOLDING:
Courts of appeals, like district courts, have the authority—though not the obligation—to raise a forfeited timeliness defense on their own initiative in exceptional ca...
Decided April 18, 2012
ISSUE: New Evidence in a §145 Proceeding
HOLDING:
There are no limitations on a patent applicant’s ability to introduce new evidence in a §145 proceeding beyond those already present in the Federal Rules of Evidence an...
Decided April 18, 2012
ISSUE: Torture Victim Protection Act
HOLDING:
As used in the TVPA, the term “individual” encompasses only natural persons. Consequently, the Act does not impose liability against organizations.
Decided April 17, 2012
ISSUE: Hatch-Waxman Amendments
HOLDING:
A generic manufacturer may employ the counterclaim provision of the Hatch-Waxman Amendments, 21 U. S. C. §355(j)(5)(C)(ii)(I), to force correction of a use code that inaccura...
Decided April 17, 2012
ISSUE: Qualified Immunity
HOLDING:
A private individual temporarily retained by the government to carry out its work is entitled to seek qualified immunity from suit under §1983.
Decided April 02, 2012
ISSUE: Strip Searches
HOLDING:
Strip search procedures at the county jails struck a reasonable balance between inmate privacy and the needs of the institutions, and persons arrested for minor offenses may be am...
Decided March 26, 2012
ISSUE: Political Question Doctrine
HOLDING:
The political question doctrine does not bar judicial review of Zi- votofsky’s claim.
Decided March 21, 2012
ISSUE: EPA Compliance Order
HOLDING:
The Sacketts may bring a civil action under the APA to challenge the issuance of the EPA's order.
Decided March 21, 2012
ISSUE: Rejected Plea Offer IAC
HOLDING:
Where counsel's ineffective advice led to an offer's rejection, and where the prejudice alleged is having to stand trial, a defendant must show that but for the ineffectiv...
Decided March 20, 2012
ISSUE: Sovereign Immunity
HOLDING:
The judgment is affirmed. A plurality concluded that suits against States under the self-care provision are barred by sovereign immunity.
Decided March 20, 2012
ISSUE: LHWCA
HOLDING:
An employee is "newly awarded compensation" when he first becomes disabled and thereby becomes statutorily entitled to benefits, no matter whether, or when, a compensati...
Decided February 29, 2012
ISSUE: Preemption
HOLDING:
Petitioners' state-law design-defect and failure-to-warn claims fall within the field of locomotive equipment regulation preempted by the LIA, as that field was defined in Nap...
Decided February 22, 2012
ISSUE: Qualified Immunity
HOLDING:
The officers are entitled to qualified immunity.
Decided January 23, 2012
ISSUE: Police GPS Tracker
HOLDING:
Police violated the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches without a warrant, when they committed a trespass by installing a GPS on defendant's car without...
Decided January 20, 2012
ISSUE: Texas Redistricting
HOLDING:
Federal courts must defer to state enacted redistricting plans when drafting interim plans where there is not a reasonable probability of a Section 5 or Constitutional violation.<...
Decided January 18, 2012
ISSUE: Public Domain Copyright
HOLDING:
Congress may restore works in the public domain to protected copyright status. Section 514 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act that restore many foreign works that had fallen into...
Decided January 18, 2012
ISSUE: Procedural Default in Capital Case
HOLDING:
Maples has shown the requisite "cause" to excuse his procedural default.
Decided January 11, 2012
ISSUE: Ministerial Exception
HOLDING:
The Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment bar suits brought on behalf of ministers against their churches, claiming termination in violation of employment...
Decided January 11, 2012
ISSUE: Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
HOLDING:
The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act extends coverage to an employee who can establish a substantial nexus between his injury and his employer’s extractive operations on th...
Decided January 11, 2012
ISSUE: Eyewitness Identification
HOLDING:
The Due Process Clause does not require a preliminary judicial inquiry into the reliability of an eyewitness identification when the identification was not procured under unnecess...
Decided January 10, 2012
ISSUE: Arbitration and Credit Repair Organizations Act
HOLDING:
Because the Credit Repair Organizations Act is silent on whether claims under the Act can proceed in an arbitrable forum, the Federal Arbitration Act requires the arbitration agre...
Decided January 10, 2012
ISSUE: Bivens Remedy
HOLDING:
Because in the circumstance of this case, state tort law authorizes adequate alternative damages actions - providing both significant deterrence and compensation - no Bivens remed...
Decided July 07, 2011
ISSUE: Vienna Convention
HOLDING:
The applications for stay of execution presented to JUSTICE SCALIA and by him referred to the Court are denied. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied.
Decided June 27, 2011
ISSUE: Mootness
HOLDING:
We conclude that the Court of Appeals had no authority to enter that judgment because it had no live controversy before it. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated, and th...
Decided June 27, 2011
ISSUE: Personal jurisdiction over foreign subsidiaries
HOLDING:
Petitioners were not amenable to suit in North Carolina on claims unrelated to any activity of petitioners in the forum State.
Decided June 27, 2011
ISSUE: Personal Jurisdiction Over Foreign Corporation
HOLDING:
JUSTICE KENNEDY, joined by THE CHIEF JUSTICE, JUSTICE SCALIA, and JUSTICE THOMAS, concluded that because J. McIntyre never engaged in any activities in New Jersey that revealed an...
Decided June 27, 2011
ISSUE: Violent Video Games
HOLDING:
Video games qualify for First Amendment protection. California’s Act does not adjust the boundaries of an existing category of unprotected speech to ensure that a definition...
Decided June 27, 2011
ISSUE: Publically Financed Candidates
HOLDING:
Arizona's matching funds scheme substantially burdens political speech and is not sufficiently justified by a compelling interest to survive First Amendment scrutiny.
Decided June 23, 2011
ISSUE: Federal Employers’ Liability Act
HOLDING:
The judgment is affirmed.
Decided June 23, 2011
ISSUE: Confrontation Clause and Lab Reports
HOLDING:
The Confrontation Clause does not permit the prosecution to introduce a forensic laboratory report containing a testimonial certification, made in order to prove a fact at a crimi...
Decided June 23, 2011
ISSUE: Federal Preemption
HOLDING:
JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to all but Part III–B–2, concluding that federal drug regulations applicable to generic drug manufacture...
Decided June 23, 2011
ISSUE: Prescription Confidentiality and First Amendment
HOLDING:
Vermont's statute, which imposes content- and speaker-based burdens on protected expression, is subject to heightened judicial scrutiny.
Decided June 23, 2011
ISSUE: Plea Agreements
HOLDING:
JUSTICE KENNEDY, joined by JUSTICE GINSBURG, JUSTICE BREYER, and JUSTICE KAGAN, concluded that defendants who enter into 11(c)(1)(C) agreements that specify a particular sentence ...
Decided June 23, 2011
ISSUE: Bankruptcy Court Jurisdiction
HOLDING:
Although the Bankruptcy Court had the statutory authority to enter judgment on Vickie's counterclaim, it lacked the constitutional authority to do so.
Decided June 20, 2011
ISSUE: Right to Counsel at Civil Contempt Proceedings
HOLDING:
The Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause does not automatically require the State to provide counsel at civil contempt proceedings to an indigent noncustodial parent wh...
Decided June 20, 2011
ISSUE: Global Warming
HOLDING:
The Second Circuit’s exercise of jurisdiction is affirmed by an equally divided Court. The Clean Air Act and the EPA action the Act authorizes displace any federal common-la...
Decided June 20, 2011
ISSUE: First Amendment Petition Clause
HOLDING:
A government employer's allegedly retaliatory actions against an employee do not give rise to liability under the Petition Clause unless the employee’s petition relates ...
Decided June 20, 2011
ISSUE: Nationwide Class Certification
HOLDING:
The certification of the plaintiff class was not consistent with Rule 23(a).
Decided June 16, 2011
ISSUE: Enhanced Sentences for Rehabilitation
HOLDING:
Section 3582(a) does not permit a sentencing court to impose or lengthen a prison term in order to foster a defendant's rehabilitation.
Decided June 16, 2011
ISSUE: Anti-Injunction Act
HOLDING:
In enjoining the state court from considering Smith’s class certification request, the federal court exceeded its authority under the "relitigation exception" to t...
Decided June 16, 2011
ISSUE: Child Custody
HOLDING:
A child’s age properly informs Miranda’s custody analysis.
Decided June 16, 2011
ISSUE: Exclusionary Rule
HOLDING:
Searches conducted in objectively reasonable reliance on binding appellate precedent are not subject to the exclusionary rule.
Decided June 16, 2011
ISSUE: Tenth Amendment Standing
HOLDING:
Bond has standing to challenge the federal statute on grounds that the measure interferes with the powers reserved to States.
Decided June 13, 2011
ISSUE: Fiduciary Exception to the Attorney-client Privilege
HOLDING:
The fiduciary exception to the attorney-client privilege does not apply to the general trust relationship between the United States and the Indian tribes.
Decided June 13, 2011
ISSUE: Liabilty of Fund Advisers for Misstatements Made by Fund
HOLDING:
Because the false statements included in the prospectuses were made by Janus Investment Fund, not by JCM, JCM and JCG cannot be held liable in a private action under Rule 10b&ndas...
Decided June 13, 2011
ISSUE: Conflict of Interest Law and First Amendment
HOLDING:
The Nevada Ethics in Government Law is not unconstitutionally overbroad. That law prohibits a legislator who has a conflict both from vot- ing on a proposal and from advocating it...
Decided June 09, 2011
ISSUE: Section 282 of the Patent Act
HOLDING:
Section 282 requires an invalidity defense to be proved by clear and convincing evidence.
Decided June 09, 2011
ISSUE: Enhanced Sentences for Crack Cocaine
HOLDING:
"[C]ocaine base," as used in §841(b)(1), means not just "crack cocaine," but cocaine in its chemically basic form.
Decided June 09, 2011
ISSUE: Section 251(c)(2) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996
HOLDING:
The FCC has advanced a reasonable interpretation of its regulations—i.e., that to satisfy its duty under §251(c)(2), an incumbent LEC must make its existing entrance fa...
Decided June 09, 2011
ISSUE: Armed Career Criminal Act
HOLDING:
Felony vehicle flight, as proscribed by Indiana law, is a violent felony for purposes of ACCA.
Decided June 06, 2011
ISSUE: Reasonable Attorney's Fees
HOLDING:
When a plaintiff’s suit involves both frivolous and non-frivolous claims, a court may grant reasonable fees to the defendant, but only for costs that the defendant would not...
Decided June 06, 2011
ISSUE: Armed Career Criminal Act
HOLDING:
A federal sentencing court must determine whether “an offense under State law” is a “serious drug offense” by consulting the “maximum term of impriso...
Decided June 06, 2011
ISSUE: Securities Fraud Class Certification
HOLDING:
Securities fraud plaintiffs need not prove loss causation in order to obtain class certification.
Decided June 06, 2011
ISSUE: Title to Federally Funded Inventions
HOLDING:
The Bayh-Dole Act does not automatically vest title to federally funded inventions in federal contractors or authorize contractors to unilaterally take title to such inventions.
Decided May 31, 2011
ISSUE: Induced Infringement Under 35 U.S.C. §271(b)
HOLDING:
Induced infringement under §271(b) requires knowledge that the induced acts constitute patent infringement. Deliberate indifference to a known risk that a patent exists does ...
Decided May 31, 2011
ISSUE: Material Witness Detention
HOLDING:
The objectively reasonable arrest and detention of a material witness pursuant to a validly obtained warrant cannot be challenged as unconstitutional on the basis of allegations t...
Decided May 26, 2011
ISSUE: Qualified Immunity Review
HOLDING:
This Court generally may review a lower court’s constitutional ruling at the behest of government officials who have won final judgment on qualified immunity grounds. ...
Decided May 26, 2011
ISSUE: Federal Witness Tampering Statute
HOLDING:
In such circumstances, the Government must establish a §1512(a)(1)(C) violation by showing there was a reasonable likelihood that a relevant communication would have been mad...
Decided May 26, 2011
ISSUE: Pretrial Motion Effect on Speedy Trial Clock
HOLDING:
The Act contains no requirement that the filing of a pretrial motion actually caused, or was expected to cause, delay of a trial. Rather, §3161(h)(1)(D) stops the Speedy Tria...
Decided May 26, 2011
ISSUE: Federal Preemption
HOLDING:
THE CHIEF JUSTICE delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I and II–A, concluding that Arizona’s licensing law is not ex- pressly preempted.
Decided May 23, 2011
ISSUE: Overcrowded Prisons
HOLDING:
The court-mandated population limit is necessary to remedy the violation of prisoners' constitutional rights and is authorized by the PLRA. he three-judge court’s order,...
Decided May 23, 2011
ISSUE: State Secrets Doctrine
HOLDING:
When, to protect state secrets, a court dismisses a Government contractor’s prima facie valid affirmative defense to the Govern- ment’s allegations of contractual brea...
Decided May 16, 2011
ISSUE: Exigent Circumstances Rule
HOLDING:
The exigent circumstances rule applies when the police do not create the exigency by engaging or threatening to engage in conduct that violates the Fourth Amendment. Assuming that...
Decided May 16, 2011
ISSUE: ERISA
HOLDING:
Although §502(a)(1)(B) did not give the District Court authority to reform CIGNA’s plan, relief is authorized by §502(a)(3), which al- lows a participant, benefici...
Decided May 16, 2011
ISSUE: Public Disclosure Bar of the False Claims Act
HOLDING:
A federal agency’s written response to a FOIA request for records constitutes a “report” within the meaning of the FCA’s public disclosure bar.
Decided May 02, 2011
ISSUE: AEDPA Clearly Established Law Standard
HOLDING:
The instructions here are surely not invalid under our decision in Beck. The concern addressed in Beck was “the risk of an unwarranted conviction” created when the jur...
Decided May 02, 2011
ISSUE: Article V(A) of the Yellowstone River Compact
HOLDING:
Because Article V(A) of the Compact incorporates the ordinary doctrine of appropriation without significant qualification, and because in Wyoming and Montana that doctrine allows ...
Decided April 27, 2011
ISSUE: Class-Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements
HOLDING:
Because it “stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress,” Hines v. Davidowitz, 312 U. S. 52, 67, Californ...
Decided April 26, 2011
ISSUE: Claim Preclusion
HOLDING:
Two suits are for or in respect to the same claim, precluding CFC jurisdiction, if they are based on substantially the same operative facts, regardless of the relief sought in eac...
Decided April 20, 2011
ISSUE: Sovereign Immunity
HOLDING:
States, in accepting federal funding, do not consent to waive their sovereign immunity to private suits for money damages under RLUIPA.
Decided April 19, 2011
ISSUE: Sovereign Immunity
HOLDING:
Ex parte Young allows a federal court to hear a lawsuit for prospective relief against state officials brought by another agency of the same State.
Decided April 04, 2011
ISSUE: Record Under Federal Habeas Review
HOLDING:
Review under §2254(d)(1) is limited to the record that was before the state court that adjudicated the claim on the merits. On the record before the state court, Pinholster w...
Decided April 04, 2011
ISSUE: Standing to Challenge State Tax Credits
HOLDING:
Because respondents challenge a tax credit as opposed to a governmental expenditure, they lack Article III standing under Flast v. Cohen.
Decided March 29, 2011
ISSUE: Exclusionary Rule
HOLDING:
The writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted.
Decided March 29, 2011
ISSUE: Standing for Medicaid Violations
HOLDING:
Suits by 340B entities to enforce ceiling-price contracts running between drug manufacturers and the Secretary of HHS are incompatible with the statutory regime. Congress vested a...
Decided March 29, 2011
ISSUE: Liability for a a Single Brady Violation
HOLDING:
A district attorney’s office may not be held liable under §1983 for failure to train its prosecutors based on a single Brady violation.
Decided March 22, 2011
ISSUE: Adequate Pleading Materiality in Securities Fraud Action
HOLDING:
Respondents have stated a claim under §10(b) and Rule 10b–5.
Decided March 22, 2011
ISSUE: Oral Complaints Under the Fair Labor Standards Act
HOLDING:
The scope of statutory term “filed any complaint” includes oral, as well as written, complaints.
Decided March 21, 2011
ISSUE: AEDPA Deference
HOLDING:
The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed in a three-paragraph unpublished memorandum opinion. In so doing, the court did not discuss any specific facts or mention the r...
Decided March 07, 2011
ISSUE: Exemption 2 of the Freedom of Information Act
HOLDING:
Because Exemption 2 encompasses only records relating to em- ployee relations and human resources issues, the explosives maps and data requested here do not qualify for withholdin...
Decided March 07, 2011
ISSUE: Meaning of "Collateral Review" Under AEDPA
HOLDING:
The phrase “collateral review” in §2244(d)(2) means judicial review of a judgment in a proceeding that is not part of direct review. A Rule 35 motion to reduce se...
Decided March 07, 2011
ISSUE: Access to DNA Evidence
HOLDING:
There is federal-court subject-matter jurisdiction over Skinner’s complaint, and the claim he presses is cognizable under §1983.
Decided March 02, 2011
ISSUE: Postsentencing Rehabilitation Evidence at Resentencing
HOLDING:
When a defendant’s sentence has been set aside on appeal, a district court at resentencing may consider evidence of the defendant’s postsentencing rehabilitation, and ...
Decided March 02, 2011
ISSUE: Protests at Military Funerals
HOLDING:
The First Amendment shields Westboro from tort liability for its picketing in this case.
Decided March 01, 2011
ISSUE: Notice of Appeal with Veterans Court
HOLDING:
The deadline for filing a notice of appeal with the Veterans Court does not have jurisdictional consequences.
Decided March 01, 2011
ISSUE: Employment Discrimination Against members of the Armed Services
HOLDING:
If a supervisor performs an act motivated by antimilitary animus that is intended by the supervisor to cause an adverse employment action, and if that act is a proximate cause of ...
Decided March 01, 2011
ISSUE: Personal Privacy for Purposes of Exemption 7(C) of the Freedom of Information Act
HOLDING:
Corporations do not have “personal privacy” for the purposes of Exemption 7(C).
Decided February 28, 2011
ISSUE: Ongoing Emergency Confrontation Clause Exception
HOLDING:
Covington’s identification and description of the shooter and the location of the shooting were not testimonial statements because they had a “primary purpose . . . to...
Decided February 23, 2011
ISSUE: Federal Preemption
HOLDING:
FMVSS 208 does not pre-empt state tort suits claiming that manufacturers should have installed lap-and-shoulder belts, instead of lap belts, on rear inner seats.
Decided February 23, 2011
ISSUE: Independent State Ground Adequate to Bar Habeas Relief
HOLDING:
California’s timeliness requirement qualifies as an independent state ground adequate to bar habeas corpus relief in federal court.
Decided February 22, 2011
ISSUE: Discriminatory Sales and Use Tax Under Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976
HOLDING:
CSX may challenge Alabama’s sales and use taxes under §11501(b)(4).
Decided February 22, 2011
ISSUE: National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act
HOLDING:
The NCVIA preempts all design-defect claims against vaccine manufacturers brought by plaintiffs seeking compensation for injury or death caused by a vaccine’s side effects.<...
Decided January 24, 2011
ISSUE: Habeas Relief - Failure to Apply State Law Standard
HOLDING:
The responsibility for assuring that the constitutionally adequate procedures governing California’s parole system are properly applied rests with California courts, and is ...
Decided January 24, 2011
ISSUE: Federal Reserve Board's Regulation Z
HOLDING:
At the time of the transactions at issue, Regulation Z did not require Chase to provide McCoy with a change-in-terms notice before implementing the agreement term allowing it to r...
Decided January 24, 2011
ISSUE: Appeal of Motion for Summary Judgment After Full Trial
HOLDING:
A party may not appeal a denial of summary judgment after a district court has conducted a full trial on the merits.
Decided January 24, 2011
ISSUE: Title VII Protection of Relative or Close Associate of a Targeted Employee
HOLDING:
If the facts Thompson alleges are true, his firing by NAS constituted unlawful retaliation.
Decided January 19, 2011
ISSUE: Background Checks and Constitutional Right to Informational Privacy
HOLDING:
We assume, without deciding, that the Constitution protects a privacy right of the sort mentioned in Whalen and Nixon. We hold, however, that the challenged portions of the Govern...
Decided January 19, 2011
ISSUE: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
HOLDING:
Moore was not entitled to the habeas relief ordered by the Ninth Circuit. The state-court decision was not an unreasonable application of either part of the Strickland
Decided January 19, 2011
ISSUE: State Court's Summary Disposition Under Strickland
HOLDING:
Section 2254(d) applies to Richter’s petition, even though the state court’s order was unaccompanied by an opinion explaining the court’s reasoning. Richte...
Decided January 11, 2011
ISSUE: Deduction in Bankruptcy for Ownership of an Auto
HOLDING:
A debtor who does not make loan or lease payments may not take the car-ownership deduction.
Decided January 10, 2011
ISSUE: N.A. Mooted
HOLDING:
Counsel for respondent Oneida Indian Nation advised the Court through a letter on November 30, 2010, that the Nation had, on November 29, 2010, passed a tribal declaration and ord...
Decided January 01, 2011
ISSUE: Taxing Medical Residents
HOLDING:
The Treasury Department’s full-time employee rule is a reasonable construction of §3121(b)(10).
Decided December 13, 2010
ISSUE: First Sale Doctrine
HOLDING:
The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.
Decided November 30, 2010
ISSUE: Suit Againt Local Government for Civil Rights Violations
HOLDING:
Monell’s “policy or custom” requirement applies in §1983 cases irrespective of whether the relief sought is monetary or prospective.
Can a company who makes genetically modified seeds limit the way farmer may use those seeds after they are purchased? What does the term "defalcation" mean in the Bankruptcy Code? Are indigent defendants who appeal their cases pursuant to the federal in forma pauperis statute permitted to amend their complaints, an allowance granted to most other litigants?
On this episode we review four notable opinions issued by the Court last month.
On this episode we reflect on the oral arguments this term and listen to the unabridged oral arguments in one of the more controversial and entertaining oral arguments of the term, Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin.
We review four cases heard in oral arguments this week. Are human genes patentable? Should a federal law that favors American Indian tribes and parents be applied to take a adoptive child from a non-Indian family to return her to a father that washed his hands of her years before? Does the Congress have the power to require a former member of the military to register as a sex offender years after he served his sentence and after leaving the military? Is a person's silence in response to police questioning prior to arrest and the giving of Miranda rights admissible as evidence against him in a subsequent trial when the defendant does not testify?
May the police bring a drug sniffing dog to the front door of your home to sniff around? May a state’s constitution ban affirmative action programs in the state?
Listen to the full oral arguments in the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) case heard by the Court today. This week Supreme Podcast reports live from the Supreme Court.
Listen to the full oral arguments in the California same sex marriage case heard by the Court today. This week Supreme Podcast reports live from the Supreme Court.
Does the U.S. Forest Service have to consider the effect of its forest thinning policies in the Sierra Nevada mountain range on fish species in nearby waters? Does federal election law preempt an Arizona law that requires the rejection of federal voter registration forms that are not supplemented by documents proving citizenship? May a student at USC have his family in Thailand send him new textbooks sold oversees for resale in the United States for a profit without violating US Copyright law? We discuss all these cases before the Supreme Court this week and more.
On this special episode we consider each of the questions presented in the upcoming gay marriage cases scheduled to be heard by the Supreme Court on March 26th and March 27th. We also review some of the more interesting amicus curiae briefs filed in the two cases.
Absent a warrant or probable cause should police be permitted to take a cheek-swap DNA sample from an individual under arrest for a serious crime in order to check the sample against those in cold case files or must police wait until the arrestee has been convicted? Do American citizens who have reason to believe their communications with foreigners are being intercepted by the US Government under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act have standing to challenge the program even though they have no way of knowing whether they are actually subject to surveillance or not?
Hear the entire oral arguments in one of the most controversial cases of the year. Should a core section of one of the country's most successful laws be struck down on the grounds that it is an overreach of federal power and is based on a factual determination made over 47 years ago?
Do farmers infringe patents held in genetically modified seeds when they plant those seeds without authorization from the patent holder? Does an alert by a trained narcotics detection dog provide police with probable cause to search a vehicle? Are aggregate limits on individual political contributions constitutional? We discuss these issues and more...
In this special episode, we discuss the constitutional implications and history of Affirmative Action and the Supreme Court's newest affirmative action case, Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin.
Can a federal law implementing a chemical weapons treaty be applied to an ordinary poisoning case, wherein a microbiologist in Pennsylvania attempted to poison a woman who had an affair with her husband? May the Supreme Court of Michigan abolish the diminished capacity defense in criminal trials in a case involving the retrial of a defendant who's original defense was the defense being abolished? Does the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (“SLUSA”) prohibit private class actions based on state law regarding a scheme of fraudulent certificates of deposit, ordinarily not covered by federal securities laws, where they are in part backed by covered securities?
Is a floating home without an engine and a self-generating power source considered a "vessel" for purposes of federal maritime jurisdiction? Should a seven year delay in bringing an indigent capital defendant to trial, due to the lack of Louisiana state funds (post-Katrina) to pay for attorneys to defend him, constitute a violation of the Sixth Amendment's Speedy Trial Clause?
Does the Constitution require a warrant before police may subject a suspected drunk driver to a blood test even if some evidence is lost while the warrant is obtained due to the natural dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream? Does federal law provide a state prisoner the right to suspend their federal habeas proceedings when they are adjudged incompetent? When Los Angeles diverted water to a monitoring station that identified pollutants in a navigable waterway did it subject itself to liability under the Clean Water Act?
In this special episode, we discuss the constitutional implications of gun regulation and the history and jurisprudence of the Second Amendment.
The central precedent cited in the upcoming gay marriage case concerning California's Proposition 8 is Romer v. Evans (1996). We present a summary of the case, consider the parallels between it and the upcoming gay marriage cases and present the full oral argument audio. You will hear the justices struggle with the question of whether a state constitutional amendment may be enacted for the purpose of taking away rights from a particular group of individuals (homosexuals). And you will hear the positions of both sides of the case.
Happy Holidays! On this episode we discuss one of the most closely guarded American values - personal privacy. We consider the major cases that establish the outer boundaries of police conduct infringing upon personal privacy and prepare you for the upcoming decision in Florida v. Jardines, a case about whether police may bring drug detection dogs to sniff at your front door without a warrant. This episode contains explicit language at the very beginning of the episode, but is clean after the 20 second mark.
We discuss two cases granted review concerning the constitutionality of two anti-gay marriage laws. The cases are United States v. Windsor, which challenges a federal law - the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and Hollingsworth v. Perry, which challenges an amendment to the California State Constitution, enacted by Proposition 8, a ballot initiative.
When the ex-wife of a US soldier wins an order in a US District Court under a treaty to take their child back to her home country of Scotland, may the father appeal the order or is the case automatically mooted because the child is no longer within the court's jurisdiction? When the government releases water from a dam causing temporary flooding and damage to land downstream does it constitute a taking requiring just compensation? Did the Supreme Court err in refusing to grant an appeal by a convicted murder sentenced to death who suffered a "most severe and unimaginable level of physical and mental abuse" as a child" - Justice Sotomayor thinks so. Is LA County liable under the Clean Water Act for polluting a river by maintaining dirty storm water sewer systems or is it saved by the construction of a single word in the act?
How should those who discover new processes of identifying and isolating human genes be rewarded for their work without hindering further research and a patient's ability to get a second opinion? We consider the case law and the morality of one of the most interesting questions the Supreme Court will be confronting this term.
Can employers be held vicariously liable for harassment by employees they empower to oversee a victim's work but not with the power to take formal employment actions against the victim? May states abolish the insanity defense? Does Obamacare violate the rights of religious institutions by creating the risk that their money might be spent by beneficiaries to procure care violate of the religious beliefs of the institutions?
Does the Constitution permit the state to collect DNA samples from persons arrested for serious crimes without a warrant? Is Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which singles out states identified in 1964 as discriminating against eligible voters for special treatment, still a valid exercise of constitutional powers 47 years later? When sentencing courts consider sentencing guidelines in effect at the time of sentencing that suggest a higher sentence than would have been recommended at the time of the underlying offense, do they run afoul of the constitutional prohibition against Ex Post Facto laws?
Are you still entitled to attorney's fees under a fee shifting statute if you lose on your monetary damages claim but prevail on your request for a permanent injunction? When seeking certification of a shareholder class action based on the fraud-on-the-market theory are you required to prove that the purported misrepresentations that caused you and your class to buy at an inflated price were material or is materiality a merits issue not relevant at the certification stage?
Can police bring a dog to your front door to smell for narcotics without probable cause? Does the first-sale doctrine apply to goods acquired abroad? Do law abiding U.S. citizens and residents have standing to challenge the possible interception of their international communications authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act? How should the IRS determine whether you should receive a credit for the payment of a foreign tax? Should a habeas petitioner with a credible claim of actual innocence who missed their filing deadline have to separately prove an extraordinary circumstance for the delay?
We trace the rise of one of the more unique justices to serve on the Court. From a childhood that began in a shanty with no bathroom and a single light bulb to a successful career in Washington, DC, the life of Justice Thomas is riveting at nearly every turn. He is the current Court's only southerner and only black justice and he has developed a unique jurisprudence that many scholars believe has persuaded many of his colleagues to alter their approach.
Is an Arizona voter ID law preempted by federal law?
What constitutes a critical mass of underrepresented minority students at higher education institutions and once achieved must such institutions discontinue their affirmative action programs? Does federal law require the deportation of a 24-year permanent legal resident for possessing 1.3 grams of marijuana (equivalent to the weight a half of a single penny)? May a state deny citizens of other states access to public records that it permits its own citizens to access?
May citizens of a foreign country living in the United States sue a foreign corporation doing business in the United States under the Alien Tort Statute for atrocities perpetrated against them by the corporation in their country of origin? May the police forcibly draw blood from a suspected drunk driver without a warrant? Is a houseboat a "vessel" for purposes of federal maritime jurisdiction?
As the Court prepares for the start of the 2012-2013 term on Monday, we prepare you for some of the more interesting issues the Court is expected to confront this term.
The First Amendment ensures that all who speak, popular and unpopular alike, are protected, and that the solution to any unfavored speech is more speech not less. The utility of that First Amendment ethos, however, has long been called into question when the corrupting influence of corporate and union money in elections is at issue. In this episode, we explore the history of campaign finance law in the United States and the landmark Supreme Court cases that have defined the outer boundaries of legislative powers in this area.
Does patent exhaustion permit a farmer to reproduce patented seeds through planting and harvesting without the patent holder’s permission?
REPORTER: Josh Kleiman
WHAT DOES THIS LANGUAGE MEAN?
FREE SPEECH:
Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech. (learn more)
WHAT IS THIS LEGAL ISSUE REALLY ABOUT?
GAY RIGHTS:
Does the Constitution protect homosexuals against discrimination? (learn more)
ABORTION, AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, CAMPAIGN FINANCE, GAY RIGHTS, GUN REGULATION
click on issue to learn moreHow Well Do You Know Your Chief Justices?
Click to QuizLittle Known Facts
Click to QuizPersonalities on the Bench
Click to QuizWomen and the Court
Click to QuizEducation Law
Click to Quiz| DATE | CASE | ISSUE | CIR. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 05-15-13 | Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co. and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. | SOL for Disability Adverse Benefit Determination under ERISA | 2nd |
| 05-13-13 | Burnside v. Walters | Amending In Forma Pauperis Complaints | 6th |
| 04-29-13 | Burrage v. United States | Distribution of Drugs Causing Death and the Meaning of Causing | 8th |
| 04-22-13 | DaimlerChrysler AG v. Bauman | Personal Jurisdiction Over Foreign Corporation | 9th |
| 04-15-13 | Sprint Communications Company v. Jacobs | Younger abstention | 8th |
| 04-01-13 | Atlantic Marine Construction Co., Inc., v. J-Crew Management, Inc. | Forum-Selection Clause | 5th |
| 04-01-13 | Marshall v. Rodgers | Clearly Established Federal Law in State Habeas Case | 9th |
| DATE | VOTE | CASE | ISSUE |
|---|---|---|---|
| 05-13-13 | 9-0 | Bullock v. BankChampaign | Defalcation in Bankruptcy |
| 05-13-13 | 9-0 | Dan's City Used Cars, Inc. v. Pelkey | Federal Preemption |
| 05-13-13 | 9-0 | Bowman v. Monsanto Co. | Patent Exhaustion |
| 04-29-13 | 5-4 | Boyer v. Louisiana | Failure to Speedily Provide Indigent Counsel |
| 04-29-13 | 9-0 | McBurney v. Young | Right to Public Records for Out-of-State Citizens |
| 04-23-13 | 7-2 | Moncrieffe v. Holder | Aggravated Felony Deportation |
| 04-17-13 | 9-0 | Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum | Corporate Liability Under Alien Tort Statute |
| DATE | CASE | ISSUE |
|---|---|---|
| 04-24-13 | Univ. of TX Southwestern Med. Center v. Nassar | Title VII Standard of Proof |
| 04-24-13 | Metrish v. Lancaster | Retroactivity of Abolished Diminished-Capacity Defense |
| 04-23-13 | Tarrant Regional Water District v. Herrmann | Interstate Compacts Governing Access to Water |
| 04-23-13 | Sekhar v. United States | Intangible Property Extortion |
| 04-22-13 | Hillman v. Maretta | Federal Preemption |
| 04-22-13 | Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International, Inc. | First Amendment |
| 04-17-13 | United States v. Kebodeaux | Sex Offender Registration |
