U.S. Supreme Court 2019 Term Arguments: Recent Episodes
Oyez
A case in which the Court upheld as constitutional a Colorado law that prohibits so-called “faithless” electors from casting their votes in the Electoral College.
A case in which the Court held that the Constitution does not prohibit Washington's “faithless elector” law, which requires presidential electors to vote the way state law directs.
Cases in which the Court held that while the Constitution does not prohibit congressional subpoenas issued to the sitting President, the courts below did not adequately weigh the separation-of-powers concerns raised by the subpoenas in these cases.
A case in which the Court held that Article II and the Supremacy Clause neither categorically preclude, nor require a heightened standard for, the issuance of a state criminal subpoena to a sitting President.
A case in which the Court held that the First Amendment’s religion clauses prevent civil courts from adjudicating employment-discrimination claims brought by an employee against her religious employer, when the employee carried out important religious functions.
A case in which the Court held that parts of eastern Oklahoma are an Indian reservation subject to exclusive federal jurisdiction for certain crimes under the Indian Major Crimes Act.
A case in which the Court held that a provision of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 creating an exception to the prohibition on automated calls for government debt collection calls violates the First Amendment but is severable from the remainder of the statute.
A case in which the Court held that the federal government acted properly when it added extensive exemptions to regulations requiring employers to include contraceptive coverage in employee health plans.
A case in which the Court held that a law conditioning federal funding to foreign affiliates of an American organization on those organizations' express policies on prostitution and sex trafficking does not violate the First Amendment because foreign corporations operating outside of the United States do not have First Amendment rights.
A case in which the Court held that the addition by an online business of a generic top-level domain (“.com”) to an otherwise generic term can create a protectable trademark if the composite term is distinct from the generic term to consumers.
A case in which the Court reversed a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upholding Louisiana’s law requiring physicians who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a local hospital because it conflicted with the Court’s binding precedent in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt.
A case in which the Court held that the vesting of substantial executive authority in the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, an independent agency led by a single director, violates the separation of powers, but the statutory provision creating that violation, 12 U.S.C. § 5491(c)(3) is severable from the Dodd-Frank Act.
A case in which the Court held that the Securities and Exchange Commission may seek and obtain disgorgement from a court as “equitable relief” for a securities law violation, subject to certain restrictions.
A case in which the Court held that 8 U.S.C. § 1252(e)(2) as applied to the respondent Thuraissigiam does not violate the Suspension Clause of the Constitution.
A case in which the Court held that the federal courts have jurisdiction to review an administrative agency’s factual findings underlying denials of withholding (and deferral) of removal relief, notwithstanding 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C), which seems to divest courts of jurisdiction in such cases.
A case in which the Court held that a dismissal without prejudice for failure to state a claim counts as a strike under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), which bars inmates from filing or appealing a federal civil action without paying the associated fees if they have filed three or more cases or appeals that were dismissed because the lawsuits were frivolous or malicious or did not properly state a legal claim for relief.
A case in which the Court held that the Ninth Circuit’s decision below was an abuse of discretion because it considered and ruled on an issue not raised by the parties.
A case in which the Court held that the U.S. Forest Service has the authority to grant rights-of-way under the Mineral Leasing Act through lands traversed by the Appalachian Trail within national forests.
A case in which the Court held that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) applies retroactively, thereby permitting recovery of punitive damages against foreign states for terrorist activities occurring prior to the passage of the current version of the statute.
A case in which the Court held a Montana state law that provides funding for education but excludes religious education options violates the Free Exercise Clause of the federal Constitution.
A case in which the Court held that the Armed Career Criminal Act’s “serious drug offense” definition requires only that a state offense involve the conduct specified in the statute; it does not require that the state offense match certain generic offenses.
A case in which the Court held that the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards does not prohibit the application of domestic equitable estoppel doctrine to allow a nonsignatory to an arbitration agreement to compel arbitration.
A case in which the Court held that the federal-sector provision of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 demands that personnel actions be untainted by any consideration of age, but but-for causation is important in determining the appropriate remedy that may be obtained.
A case in which the Court held that Baroni and Kelly, who executed the New Jersey “Bridgegate” political retribution scheme against Fort Lee’s mayor, did not violate the federal-program fraud or wire fraud laws because they did not aim to obtain money or property from the federal Port Authority.
A case in which the Court held that under Section 35 of the Lanham Act, a plaintiff does not need to show willful infringement to receive an award of an infringer’s profits for a violation of Section 43(a).
A case in which the Court held that an ERISA plan participant lacks judicial standing to seek injunctive relief or restoration of plan losses caused by fiduciary breach if he cannot demonstrate individual financial loss or the imminent risk thereof.
A case in which the Court held that because the trademark action at issue challenged different conduct—and raised different claims—from an earlier action between the parties, Marcel cannot preclude Lucky Brand from raising new defenses, including a defense that Lucky Brand failed to press fully in the earlier suit.
A case in which the Court held that a state court of appeals, not a jury, can reweigh aggravating and mitigating circumstances on habeas corpus review in death penalty cases.
A case in which the Court held that a child’s “habitual residence” under the Hague Convention depends on the totality of the circumstances specific to the case, not categorical requirements such as an actual agreement between parents.
A case in which the Court held that the federal government has an obligation to pay the insurance carriers in this case for losses incurred under the "Risk Corridors" program of the Affordable Care Act as a result of their participation in the health care marketplace.
A case in which the Court held that a criminal defendant's district-court argument for a specific sentence preserved his claim on appeal that the sentence imposed was unreasonably long.
A case in which the Court held that 35 U.S.C. §314(d) precludes judicial review of a Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decision to institute inter partes review upon finding that §315(b)’s time bar did not apply.
A case in which the Court held that the phrase “questions of law” in the Immigration and Nationality Act’s Limited Review Provision, 8 U. S. C. §1252(a)(2)(D), includes the application of a legal standard to undisputed or established facts.
A case in which the Court held that a timely Rule 59(e) motion to “amend or alter” a habeas court’s judgment is not a second or successive habeas petition.
A case in which the Court held that under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 requirement that plaintiffs with “actual knowledge” of an alleged fiduciary breach must file suit within three years of gaining that knowledge, a plaintiff does not necessarily have “actual knowledge” of the information contained in disclosures that he receives but does not read or cannot recall reading.
A case in which the Court held that the landowners in this case were potentially responsible parties under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and thus need the Environmental Protection Agency’s approval to take remedial action.
A case in which the Court vacated the ruling below that had applied a federal common-law rule on how to allocate a tax refund paid to an affiliated group.
A case in which the Court was asked to decide whether New York City’s ban on transporting a licensed, locked, and unloaded handgun to a home or shooting range outside city limits is consistent with the Second Amendment, the Commerce Clause, and the constitutional right to travel.
A case in which the Court held that the government edict doctrine extends to—and thus renders uncopyrightable—the annotations in the Official Code of Georgia Annotated.
A case in which the Court held that a claim of race discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 requires that the plaintiff show that race was a but-for cause of the plaintiff's injury.
A case in which the Court held that a bankruptcy court’s order unreservedly denying relief from the automatic stay of creditor debt-collection efforts outside the bankruptcy forum is final and immediately appealable.
A case in which the Court held that the family of a Mexican teenager who was killed by a U.S. Border Patrol agent in a cross-border shooting cannot sue the agent for damages under the U.S. Constitution.
A case in which the Court held that the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program was arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act.
A case in which the Court was asked to decide whether generalized allegations of harm satisfy the "more harm than good" pleading standard for ERISA claims.
A case in which the Court held the Clean Water Act requires a permit when pollutants originate from a point source but are conveyed to navigable waters by a nonpoint source, such as groundwater, if the conveyance is the "functional equivalent" of a direct discharge.
A case in which the Court held that under federal maritime law a safe-berth clause in a voyage charter contract is a guarantee of a ship’s safety, not merely a duty of due diligence.
A case in which the Court held that the Copyright Remedy Clarification Act was not a valid abrogation of state sovereign immunity to allow authors of original expression to sue states who infringe their federal copyrights.
A case in which the Court held that when a police officer lacks information to suggest that the person driving a vehicle is not the vehicle’s owner, an investigative traffic stop made after running the vehicle’s license plate and learning that the registered owner’s driver’s license has been revoked is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.
A case in which the Court held that in determining eligibility for cancellation of removal of a lawful permanent resident who commits a serious crime, an offense listed in 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2) committed during the initial seven years of residence need not be one of the offenses of removal.
A case in which the Court was asked to decide whether its prior decision regarding constitutional rules for sentencing juveniles is a substantive rule of constitutional law and thus retroactive, as the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, below, concluded in direct conflict with Virginia’s highest court.
A case in which the Court upheld Kansas's prosecution of noncitizens who used stolen social security numbers to gain employment.
A case in which the Court held that the one-year statute of limitations under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act begins when the violation occurred, not when the violation was discovered.
A group of cases in which the Court will decide the constitutionality of President Barack Obama’s appointments (without their being confirmed by the Senate) to the oversight board created to help Puerto Rico recover from its substantial indebtedness.
A case in which the Court held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits against employment discrimination “because of . . . sex” encompasses discrimination based on an individual’s sexual orientation.
A case in which the Court held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination against transgender employees based on their status as transgender.
A case in which the Court held that the phrase “[a]ll the expenses of the proceedings” in 35 U.S.C. § 145 does not include attorneys’ fees incurred as a result of defending the agency in § 145 litigation.
A case in which the Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment fully incorporates the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee of a unanimous verdict against the states.
A case in which the Court held that it does not violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments for a state to abolish the insanity defense.