Goldstein's Supreme Court Summary

2001 Supreme Court Docket Summary
— By Thomas Goldstein

2001 Monthly Sittings: Oct | Nov | Dec | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr ||
Not Yet Scheduled || Cases Reversals || Affirmances || Dismissals || Non argued
2000 Supreme Court Docket Archive

October 2001 Case List As of July 9, 2002
Granted cases for the term: 76 ll Cases decided to date: 62 ll Remaining cases: 8
Summary reversals: 2 ll Summary affirmances: 4 ll Dismissed cases: 3

—OCTOBER SITTING—

Great-West Life & Ann. v. Knudson
(99-1786 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/99-1786.htm)
(1/22; 10/1; 1/8) (CA9; Aff.; 5-4)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/99-1786.pdf
ERISA § 502(a)(3) does not provide jurisdiction over recoupment actions by plan fiduciaries.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [AS] & WHR, SOC, AMK, CT
Dissent: [JPS]; [RBG] & JPS, DS, SGB
Correctional Services v. Malesko
(00-860 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-860.htm)
(3/5; 10/1; 11/27) (CA2; Rev.; 5-4)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-860.pdf
A private corporation acting under color of law may not be held liable under Bivens.
Class: civil rights; business; constitutional
Majority: [WHR] & SOC, AS, AMK, CT
Concurrence: [AS] & CT
Dissent: [JPS] & DS, RBG, SGB
FCC v. Gulf Power
(00-843 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-843.htm,
00-832http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-832.htm)
(1/22; 10/2; 1/16) (CA11; Rev.; Unan./6-2)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-832.pdf
The rate-setting provisions of the Pole Attachment Act apply to cable attachments for internet service and also to wireless attachments.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [AMK] & WHR, JPS, AS, RBG, SGB
Concurrence in part and dissent in part: [CT] & DS (dissent re cable-internet attachments)
Out: [SOC]
Chickasaw Nation v. United States
(00-507 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-507.htm)
(1/22; 10/2; 11/27) (CA10; Aff.; 7-2)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-507.pdf
The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act does not immunize tribes from wagering taxes.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [SGB] & WHR, JPS, AMK, RBG & in part AS, CT
Dissent: [SOC] & DS
J.E.M. Ag v. Pioneer Hi-Bred
(99-1996 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/99-1996.htm)
(2/20; 10/3; 12/10) (CAFC; Aff.; 6-2)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/99-1996.pdf
Patent protection for new plant varieties is available under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [CT] & WHR, AS, AMK, DS &RBG
Concurrence: [AS]
Dissent: [SGB] & JPS
Out: [SOC]
New York v. FERC
(00-568 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-568.htm,
00-809http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-809.htm)
(2/26; 10/3; 3/4) (CADC; Aff; Unan. & 6-3)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-568.pdf
FERC did not exceed its jurisdiction by including unbundled retail transmissions within the scope of an open-access order.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [JPS] & WHR, SOC, DS, RBG, SGB & in part AS, AMK, CT
Concurrence in part and dissent in part: [CT] & AS, AMK
USPS v. Gregory
(00-758 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-758.htm)
(2/20; 10/9; 11/3) (CAFC; Rev.; 9-0)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-758.pdf
In federal employee disciplinary proceedings, the government may consider prior actions that are being grieved by the employee.
Class: general civil; non-business; statutory
Majority: [SOC] & WHR, JPS, AS, AMK, DS, CT, SGB
Concurrence: [CT]
Concurrence in judgment: [RBG]
TRW v. Andrews
(00-1045http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1045.htm)
(3/5; 10/9; 11/13) (CA9; Rev.; 9-0)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1045.pdf
The Fair Credit Reporting Act’s statute of limitations does not incorporate a "discovery" rule.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [RBG] & WHR, JPS, SOC, AMK, DS, SGB
Concurrence in judgment: [AS] & CT
FCC v. Iowa Utilities Bd.
(00-587 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-587.htm and other consolidated cases)
(1/22; 10/10; 5/13) (CA8; Aff in pt, Rev in pt; 6-2)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-511.pdf
The FCC can require state commissions to set the rates charged by incumbents for leased elements under the 1996 Telecommunications Act on a forward-looking basis untied to the incumbents’ investment.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [DS] & WHR, JPS, AK, RGB & in part CT& in separate part AS
Concurrence in part and dissent in part: [SGB] & in part AS
Out: [SOC]
EEOC v. Waffle House
(99-1823 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/99-1823.htm)
(3/26; 10/10; 1/15) (CA4; Rev; 6-3)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/99-1823.pdf
The EEOC may pursue individual judicial relief on behalf of an employee who has agreed to arbitrate.
Class: civil rights; business; statutory
Majority: [JPS] & SOC, AMK, DS, RBG, SGB
Dissent: [CT] & WHR, AS

—NOVEMBER SITTING—

Lee v. Kemna
(00-6933 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-6933.htm)
(2/26; 10/29; 1/22) (CA8; Rev.; 6-3)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-6933.pdf
Relief is available to this petitioner on his claim that he was improperly precluded from presenting alibi witnesses.
Class: criminal; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [RBG] & WHR, JPS, SOC, DS, SGB
Dissent: [AMK] & AS, CT
Dusenbury v. United States
(00-6567 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-6567.htm)
(2/26; 10/29; 1/8) (CA6; Aff.; 5-4)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-6567.pdf
The government is not constitutionally required to prove a prisoner received actual notice of a forfeiture proceeding.
Class: criminal & civil rights; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [WHR] & SOC, AS, AMK, CT
Dissent: [RBG] & JPS, DS, SGB
Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition
(00-795 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-795.htm)
(1/22; 10/30; 4/16) (CA9; Aff.; 6-3)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-795.pdf
The First Amendment bars a prohibition on a visual depiction that "appears to be," or that is promoted as, child pornography.
Class: civil rights; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [AMK] & JPS, DS, RBG, SGB
Concurrence in judgment: [CT]
Concurrence in judgment in part and dissent in part: [SOC] & in part WHR, AS
Dissent: [WHR] & in part AS (all but paragraph discussing legislative history)
Kansas v. Crane
(00-957 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-957.htm)
(4/2; 10/30; 1/22) (KA; Rev.; 7-2)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-957.pdf
Civil commit of a sexually violent predator requires proof of a serious inability to control his behavior.
Class: civil rights & criminal; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [SGB] & WHR, JPS, SOC, AMK, DS, RBG
Dissent: [AS] & CT
Chao v. Mallard Bay Drilling
(00-927 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-927.htm)
(2/20; 10/31; 1/9) (CA5; Rev.; Unan. [8-0])
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-927.pdf
OSHA has jurisdiction over vessels in navigable waters.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [JPS] & unanimous
Out: [AS]
Adarand Constr. v. Mineta
(00-730 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-730.htm)
(3/26; 10/31; 11/27) (CA10; Dism.; Unan.)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-730.pdf
The petition is dismissed as improvidently granted.
Class: civil rights; business; constitutional
Majority: [PC] & unanimous
Mickens v. Taylor
(00-9285 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-9285.htm)
(4/16; 11/5; 3/27) (CA4; Aff; 5-4)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-9285.pdf
In order to demonstrate a Sixth Amendment violation where the trial court fails to inquire into a potential conflict of interest about which it knew or reasonably should have known, defendant must establish that a conflict of interest adversely affected his counsel’s performance.
Class: criminal; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [AS] & WHR, SOC, AMK, CT
Concurrence: [AMK] & SOC
Dissents: [JPS]; [DS]; [SGB] & RBG
United States v. Vonn
(00-973 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-973.htm)
(2/26; 11/6; 3/4) (CA9; Rev; 8-1)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-973.pdf
A defendant who lets Rule 11 error pass without objection in the trial court must satisfy Rule 52(b)’s plain-error rule.
Class: criminal; non-business; statutory
Majority: [DS] & WHR, SOC, AS, AMK, CT, RBG, SJB & in part JPS
Concurrence in part and dissent in part: [JPS]
United States v. Knights
(00-1260 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1260.htm)
(5/14; 11/6; 12/10) (CA9; Rev.; Unan.)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1260.pdf
The Fourth Amendment does not prohibit searching a probationer upon "reasonable suspicion" when authorized as a condition of probation.
Class: criminal; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [WHR] & unanimous
Concurrence: [DS]
Toyota Motor Mfg. v. Williams
(00-1089 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1089.htm)
(4/16; 11/7; 1/8) (CA6; Rev.; Unan.)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1089.pdf
The ADA applies to persons with impairments that severely restrict their own performance of activities that are of central importance to most persons’ lives.
Class: civil rights; business; statutory
Majority: [SOC] & unanimous
Barnhart v. Sigmon Coal
(00-1307 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1307.htm)
(4/23; 11/7; 2/19) (CA4; Aff.; 6-3)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1307.pdf
The 1992 Coal Act does not permit the government to assign liability for beneficiaries to the successor of a defunct coal operator.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [CT] & WHR, AS, AMK, DS, RBG
Dissent: [JPS] & SOC, SGB

—DECEMBER SITTING—

Raygor v. Regents of Univ. of MN
(00-1514 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1514.htm)
(6/4; 11/26; 2/27) (MN; Aff.; 6-3)http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1514.pdf
The tolling provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1367(d) does not apply to claims against a state that are dismissed under the Eleventh Amendment.
Class: civil rights; non-business; statutory
Majority: [SOC] & WHR, AS, AMK, CT
Concurrence in part & in the judgment: [RBG]
Dissent: [JPS] & DS, SGB
Kelly v. South Carolina
(00-9280 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-9280.htm)
(6/25; 11/26; 1/9) (SC; Rev.; 5-4)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-9280.pdf
By raising a defendant’s dangerousness in prison, the state triggers the rule of Simmons v. South Carolina that the defendant has the right to tell the jury that he would be parole ineligible if sentenced to life in prison.
Class: criminal; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [DS] & JPS, SOC, RBG, SGB
Dissents: [WHR] & AMK; [CT] & AS
United States v. Arvizu
(00-1519 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1519.htm)
(6/4; 11/27; 1/15) (CA9; Rev.; Unan.)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1519.pdf
The totality of circumstances are relevant in determining"reasonable suspicion" under the 4th Amendment.
Class: criminal; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [WHR] & unanimous
Concurrence: [AS]
Owasso Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Falvo
(00-1073 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1073.htm)
(6/25; 11/27; 2/19) (CA10; Rev.; 9-0)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1519.pdf
Federal law does not prevent students from grading each others’ homework.
Class: civil rights; non-business; statutory
Majority: [AMK] & WHR, JPS, SOC, DS, CT, RBG, SGB
Concurrence in the judgment: [AS]
McKune v. Lile
(00-1187 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1187.htm)
(5/14; 11/28; 6/10) (CA10; Rev.; 4-1-4)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1187.pdf
A state sex abuse treatment program that conditions prison privileges on disclosure of past misconduct does not violate 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination.
Class: criminal; non-business; constitutional
Plurality: [AMK] & WHR, AS, CT
Concurrence in the judgment: [SOC]
Dissent: [JPS] & DS, RBG, SGB
Ashcroft v. ACLU
(00-1293 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1293.htm)
(5/21; 11/28; 5/13) (CA3; Rev; 8-1)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1293.pdf
COPA provision prohibiting making materials available to minors that, according to an average person applying contemporary community standards, is harmful to minors is not substantially overbroad for First Amendment purposes.
Class: civil rights; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [CT] & WHR, AS & in part SOC & in separate part SGB
Concurrences in part & in the judgment: [SOC]; [SGB]
Concurrence in the judgment: [AMK] & DS, RBG
Dissent: [JPS]
Thomas v. Chicago Park Dist.
(00-1249 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1249.htm)
(5/29; 12/3; 1/15) (CA7; Aff.; Unan.)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1249.pdf
A content neutral permitting scheme regulating use of a public forum is not subject to Freedman v. Maryland.
Class: civil rights; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [AS] & unanimous
WI Dep’t of Health & Fam. v. Blumer
(00-952 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-952.htm)
(6/25; 12/3; 2/20) (WI; Rev.; 6-3)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-952.pdf
A state may require that income of an institutionalized spouse be attributed to a community spouse prior to the spouse’s assets for purposes of Medicaid.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [RBG] & WHR, AMK, DS, CT, SGB
Dissent: [JPS] & SOC, AS
Los Angeles v. Alameda Books
(00-799 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-799.htm)
(3/5; 12/4; 5/13) (CA9; Rev; 5-4)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-799.pdf
The Court of appeals’ decision that a city must create a specific evidentiary record justifying zoning of adult businesses is reversed.
Class: civil rights; business; constitutional
Plurality: [SOC] & WHR, AS, CT
Concurrence: [AS]
Concurrence in the judgment: [AMK]
Dissent: [DS] & JPS, RBG, & in part SGB
US Airways v. Barnett
(00-1250http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1250.htm)
(4/16; 12/4; 4/29) (CA9; Rev; 5-4)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1250.pdf
An employer’s showing that a requested accommodation conflicts with seniority rules is ordinarily sufficient to show, as a matter of law, that an accommodation is not "reasonable."
Class: civil rights; business; statutory
Majority: [SGB] & WHR, JPS, SOC, AMK
Concurrences: [JPS]; [SOC]
Dissents: [AS] & CT; [DS] & RBG
United States v. PSC of Md.
(00-1711, 00-1531 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1711.htm)
(6/25; 12/5; 5/20) (CA4; Rev; Unan [8-0])
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1531.pdf
Federal courts may review whether a Public Utility Commission’s interpretation of an interconnection agreement complies with the 1996 Telecommunications Act under 18 U.S.C. 1331.
Class: general civil; business; statutory & constitutional
Majority: [AS] & unanimous
Concurrences: [AMK]; [DS] & RGB, SGB
Out: [SOC]

—JANUARY SITTING—

Ragsdale v. Wolverine Worldwide
(00-6029 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-6029.htm)
(6/25; 1/7; 3/19) (CA8; Aff; 5-4)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-6029.pdf
A regulation that provides that the twelve week maximum leave requirement of the Family Medical Leave Act is triggered only upon notice by the employer is contrary to the FMLA and beyond the Secretary of Labor’s authority and therefore is invalid.
Class: civil rights; business; statutory
Majority: [AMK] & WHR, JPS, AS, CT
Dissent: [SOC] & DS, RBG, SGB
Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Coun. v. Tahoe Reg. Plan. Agency
(00-1167 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1167.htm)
(6/29; 1/7; 4/23) (CA9; Aff; 6-3)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1167.pdf
The moratoria on development ordered by respondents do not constitute a per se compensable taking.
Class: civil rights; business; constitutional
Majority: [JPS] & SOC, AMK, DS, RBG, SGB
Dissents: [WHR] & AS, CT; [CT] & AS
Edelman v. Lynchburg College
(00-1072 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1072.htm)
(6/25; 1/8; 3/19) (CA4; Rev; 9-0)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1072.pdf
A regulation that provides that the failure to verify a discrimination charge may be corrected after the filing deadline is valid.
Class: civil rights; business; statutory
Majority: [DS] & WHR, JPS, AMK, CT, RBG, SGB
Concurrence: [CT]
Concurrence in the judgment: [SOC] & AS
Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki
(00-1543 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1543.htm)
(6/18; 1/8; 5/28) (CAFC; Rev; Unan)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1543.pdf
Prosecution history estoppel may apply to any claim amendment made to satisfy the Patent Act’s requirements, not just to amendments made to avoid prior art, but estoppel need not bar suit against every equivalent to the amended claim element.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [AMK] & unanimous
Young v. United States
(00-1567 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1567.htm)
(9/25; 1/9; 3/4) (CA1; Aff; Unan)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1567.pdf
The "lookback" period for tax debts is tolled during bankruptcy proccedings.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [AS] & Unan
National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Morgan
(00-1614 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1614.htm)
(6/25; 1/9; 6/10) (CA9; Aff in part, Rev in part; 5-4)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1614.pdf
A charge alleging a hostile work environment under Title VII is not time-barred if all acts constituting the claim are part of the same unlawful practice and at least one act falls within the filing period.
Class: civil rights; business; statutory
Majority: [CT] & JPS, DS, RBG, SJB & in part WHR, SOC, AS, AMK
Concurrence in part and dissent in part: [SOC] & WHR, AS & in part AMK & in separate part SJB
Porter v. Nussle
(00-853 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-853.htm)
(6/4; 1/14; 2/26) (CA2; Rev; Unan.)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-853.pdf
The Prison Litigation Reform Act requires exhaustion of excessive force claims.
Class: criminal & civil rights; non-business; statutory
Majority: [RBG] & unanimous
United States v. Craft
(00-1831 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1831.htm)
(9/25; 1/14; 4/17) (CA6; Rev.; 6-3)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1831.pdf
Federal tax liens do attach to tenancies by their entireties.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [SOC] & WHR, AMK, DS, RBG, SGB
Dissents: [AS] & CT; [CT] & AS, JPS
Swierkiewicz v. Sorema, NA
(00-1853 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1853.htm)
(9/25; 1/15; 2/26) (CA2; Rev.; Unan.)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1853.pdf
An employment discrimination complaint need not plead proof sufficient to make out a prima facie case.
Class: civil rights; business; statutory
Majority: [CT] & unanimous
Hoffman Plastic Compound v. NLRB
(00-1595 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1595.htm)
(9/25; 1/15; 3/27) (CADC; Rev; 5-4)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1595.pdf
The back pay remedy of the NLRA does not apply to illegal aliens.
Class: civil rights; business; statutory
Majority: [WHR] & SOC, AS, AMK, CT
Dissent: [SGB] & JPS, DS, RBG
Rush Prudential HMO v. Moran
(00-1021 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1021.htm)
(6/29; 1/16, 6/20) (CA7; Aff, 5-4)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1021.pdf
ERISA does not preempt state "independent review board" requirements.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [DS] & JPS, SDO, RBG, SJB
Dissent: [CT], WHR, AS, AMK
Barnhart v. Walton
(00-1937 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1937.htm)
(9/25; 1/16; 3/27) (CA4; Rev.; 9-0)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1937.pdf
"Disability" under Social Security Act does not include year-long impairment that doesn’t preclude work for at least one year.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [SGB] & Unan. in part; & WHR, JPS, SOC, AMK, DS, CT, RBG in part
Concurrence in part and in the judgment: [AS]

—FEBRUARY SITTING—

HUD v. Rucker
(00-1770 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1770.htm)
(9/25; 2/19; 3/26) (CA9; Rev; Unan [8-0])
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1770.pdf
A public housing resident may be evicted based on drug use of any member of household, guest, or other person under their control, even if the resident did not have reason to know of that activity.
Class: civil rights; non-business; statutory & constitutional
Majority: [WHR] & unanimous
Out: [SGB]
Alabama v. Shelton
(00-1214 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1214.htm)
(5/14; 2/19; 5/20) (AL, Aff, 5-4)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1214.pdf
A suspended sentence that may result in the actual deprivation of liberty may not be imposed unless the defendant was afforded counsel.
Class: criminal; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [RBG] & JPS, SOC, DS, SGB
Dissent: [AS] & WHR, AMK, CT
Zelman v. Simmons-Harris
(00-1751 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1751.htm and consolidated cases)
(9/25; 2/20)
In what circumstances are voucher programs constitutional?
Class: general civil; non-business; constitutional
Atkins v. Virginia
(00-8452 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-8452.htm)
(9/25; 2/20, 6/20) (VA; Rev; 6-3)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-8452.pdf
Executions of mentally retarded criminals are "cruel and unusual punishments" prohibited by the Eighth Amendment.
Class: criminal; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [JPS] & SDO, AMK, DS, RBG, SJB
Dissent: [WHR], AS, CT; [AS], WHR, CT
FMC v. South Carolina Port Auth.
(01-46 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-46.htm)
(10/15; 2/25; 5/28) (CA4; Aff.; 5-4)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-46.pdf
Administrative adjudication instituted by a private party against a state violates the Eleventh Amendment.
Class: civil rights; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [CT] & WHR, AS, AMK, SOC
Dissent: [SGB], RBG, DS, JPS
Lapides v. Board of Regents
(01-298 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-298.htm)
(10/29; 2/25; 5/13) (CA11; Rev; Unan)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-298.pdf
A state waives its Eleventh Amendment immunity when it removes a case from state to federal court.
Class: civil rights; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [SGB] & Unan
Thompson v. Western States Med. Ctr.
(01-344 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-344.htm)
(10/29; 2/26; 4/29) (CA9; Aff; 5-4)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-344.pdf
The prohibition on advertising compounded drugs (as a condition for exemption from FDA approval requirements) violates the First Amendment.
Class: civil rights; business; constitutional
Majority: [SOC] & AS, AMK, DS, CT
Concurrence: [CT]
Dissent: [SGB] & WHR, JPS, RBG
Watchtower Bible & Tract Soc. v. Stratton, OH
(00-1737 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1737.htm)
(10/15; 2/26; 6/17) (CA6; REV; 8-1)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1737.pdf
A permit scheme for door-to-door advocacy violates the First Amendment.
Class: civil rights; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [JPS] & SOC, AMK, DS, RGB, SJB
Concurrence in the judgment: [AS] & CT
Dissent: [WHR]
Chevron U.S.A. v. Echazabal
(00-1406 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-1406.htm)
(10/27; 2/27; 6/10) (CA9; Rev; Unan)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1406.pdf
The ADA "direct threat" defense does apply when the employee is a threat to himself.
Class: civil rights; business; statutory
Majority: [DS] & Unanimous
Newland v. Saffold
(01-301 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-301.htm)
(10/15; 2/27; 6/17) (CA9; Rev; 5-4)
AEDPA statute of limitations is tolled during time between lower court’s decision and filing of notice of appeal in higher state court.
Class: criminal; non-business; statutory
Majority: [SJB] & JPS, SOC, DS, RBG
Dissent: [AMK] & WHR, AS, CT

—MARCH SITTING—

Harris v. United States
(00-10666 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-10666.htm)
(12/10; 3/18)
Must the element of "brandishing" under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A) be charged in the indictment and proved beyond a reasonable doubt?
Class: criminal; non-business; statutory
SEC v. Zanford
(01-147 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-147.htm)
(11/8; 3/18; 6/3) (CA4; Rev.; Unan.)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-147.pdf
A stockbroker’s intentional misappropriation of client’s proceeds is "in connection with the . . . sale" of securities under the securities laws.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [JPS] & unanimous
Board of Educ. v. Earls
(01-332 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-332.htm)
(11/8; 3/19)
Does the Fourth Amendment permit suspicionless drug testing of students who wish to participate in extracurricular activities?
Class: criminal; non-business; constitutional
Holmes Group v. Vornado Air Circulation Sys.
(01-408 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-408.htm)
(11/8; 3/19; 6/3) (CAFC; Rev; 9-0)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-408.pdf
The Federal Circuit lacks exclusive jurisdiction over a case in which the complaint does not allege a patent-law claim but the answer contains a patent-law counterclaim.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [AS] & WHR, AMK, DS, CT, SGB & in part JPS
Concurrence in part & in judgment: [JPS]
Concurrence in judgment: [RBG] & SOC
Gisbrecht v. Massanari
(01-131 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-131.htm)
(11/26; 3/20; 5/28) (CA9; Rev; 8-1)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-131.pdf
Contingent fee arrangements are permissible in Social Security cases, but fees yielded by those agreements must be reviewed for reasonableness.
Class: civil rights; business; statutory
Majority: [RBG] & WHR, JPS, SOC, AMK, DS, CT, SGB
Dissent: [AS]
Christopher v. Harbury
(01-394 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-394.htm)
(12/10; 3/25, 6/20) (CADC; Rev; 9-0)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-394.pdf
Government officials cannot be sued for misleading an individual on the ground that it interfered with access to the courts when the access-to-the-courts complaint fails to state a specific underlying cause of action.
Class: civil rights; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [DS] & WHR, JPS, SOC, AS, AMK, RBG, SJB
Concurrence in the judgement: [CT]
Bell v. Cone
(01-400 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-400.htm)
(12/10; 3/25; 5/28) (CA6, Rev; 8-1)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-400.pdf
Cronic, rather than Strickland, governs an ineffective assistance of counsel claim only when counsel totally fails to oppose the prosecution.
Class: criminal; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [WHR] & SOC, AS, AMK, DS, CT, RBG, SGB
Dissent: [JPS]
Republican Party of MN v. Kelly
(01-521 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-521.htm)
(12/3; 3/26)
Does the First Amendment guarantee judicial candidates the right to announce views on disputed legal or political issues?
Class: civil rights; non-business; constitutional
Devlin v. Scardelletii
(01-417 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-417.htm)
(12/10; 3/26; 6/10) (CA4; Rev.; 6-3)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-417.pdf
Non-named class members who have objected in a timely manner to approval of a settlement at a fairness hearing have the power to bring an appeal without first intervening.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [SOC] & WHR, JPS, DS, RBG, SJB
Dissent: [AS] & AMK, CT
Utah v. Evans
(01-714 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-714.htm)
(1/22; 3/27, 6/20) (D. Ut.; Aff; 5-4)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-714.pdf
The Census Bureau’s use of "hot-deck imputation" in calculating the 2000 census did not violate the Census Clause or 13 U.S.C. § 195.
Class: general civil; non-business; statutory & constitutional
Majority: [SJB] & WHR, JPS, DS, RBG, & in part SOC
Concurrence in part and dissent in part: [SOC]; [CT] & AMK
Dissent: [AS]

—APRIL SITTING—

United States v. Cotton
(01-687 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-687.htm)
(1/4; 4/15; 5/20) (CA4; Rev; Unan)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-687.pdf
Apprendi claims are subject to harmless error review.
Class: criminal; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [WHR] & unanimous
Franconia Assocs. v. United States
(01-455 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-455.htm)
(1/4; 4/15; 6/10) (CAFC; Rev; Unan)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-455.pdf
Breach of contract and takings claims accrue against the government when the government dishonors its obligation, not upon enactment of the challenged statute.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [RBG] & Unanimous
United States v. Drayton
(01-631 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-631.htm)
(1/4; 4/16; 6/17) (CA11; Rev; 6-3)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-631.pdf
The Fourth Amendment does not require police officers to advise bus passengers of their right not to cooperate and to refuse to consent to searches.
Class: criminal; non-business; constitutional
Majority: [AMK] & WHR, SOC, AS, CT, SJB
Dissent: [DS] & JPS, RBG
BE&K Constr. v. NLRB
(01-518 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-518.htm)
(1/4; 4/16)
May employers be held liable for retaliatory suits that are not objectively baseless?
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Chase Manhattan Bank v. Traffic Stream
(01-651 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-651.htm)
(1/4; 4/17; 6/10) (CA2; Rev; Unan)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-651.pdf
A corporation organized under the laws of BVI is a "citize[n] or subjec[t] of a foreign state" for purposes of alienage diversity jurisdiction.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [DS] & Unanimous
Hope v. Pelzer
(01-309 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-309.htm)
(1/4; 4/17)
When are rights "clearly established" for purposes of qualified immunity?
Class: civil rights; non-business; constitutional
United States v. Fior D’Italia
(01-463 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-463.htm)
(1/11; 4/22; 6/17) (CA11; Rev; 6-3)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-463.pdf
The tax law authorizes the IRS to use an "aggregation estimation" method in computing tips for FICA purposes.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/17jun20021100/www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-463.pdf
Majority: [SJB] & WHR, JPS, SOC, AMK, RBG
Dissent: [DS] & AS, CT
Ring v. Arizona
(01-488 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-488.htm)
(1/11; 4/22)
Must the jury, rather than the judge, find aggravating factors in capital sentencing?
Class: criminal; non-business; constitutional
Barnes v. Gorman
(01-682 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-682.htm)
(1/11; 4/23; 6/17) (CA8; Rev; 9-0)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-682.pdf
Punitive damages may not be awarded in private suits brought under Section 202 of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.
Class: civil rights; business; statutory
Majority: [AS] & WHR, SOC, AMK, DS, CT
Concurrence: [DS]& SOC
Concurrence in the judgement: [JPS] & RBG, SJB
City of Columbus v. Ours Garage & Wrecker Serv.
(01-419 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-419.htm)
(1/4; 4/23, 6/20) (CA6; Rev; 7-2)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-419.pdf
Federal law does not bar a State from delegating to a municipality the State’s authority to establish safety regulations governing tow trucks.
Class: general civil; business; statutory
Majority: [RBG] & WHR, JPS, AMK, DS, CT, SJB
Dissent: [AS] & SDO
Gonzaga Univ. v. Doe
(01-679 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-679.htm)
(1/11; 4/24; 6/20) (WA; Rev; 7-2)
FERPA’s confidentiality provisions create no private rights to enforce under Section 1983.
Class: civil rights; non-business; statutory
Majority: [WHR] & SDO, AS, AMK, CT
Concurrence in the judgment: [SJB] & DS
Dissent: [JPS]& RBG
United States v. Ruiz
(01-595 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-595.htm)
(1/4; 4/24)
May the government condition plea agreement program and downward departure recommendation on waiver of Brady rights?
C lass: criminal; non-business; constitutional

—CASES NOT YET SCHEDULED FOR ARGUMENT—

—DISMISSED CASES —

00-8727 McCarver v. North Carolina—executing the mentally retarded

Mathias v. Worldcom Tech.
(00-878 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/00-878.htm)
(3/5; 12/5; 5/20) (CA7, DIG’d)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-878.pdf

Dismissed as improvidently granted.

Majority: [PC] & Unan

Adams v. Florida Power
(01-584 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-584.htm)
(12/3; 3/20; 4/1) (CA11; Dism; Unan)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/01-584.pdf

—REVERSALS—

01-835 Sao Paulo v. American Tobacco
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-835.htm
[Goldstein for petitioner] (summary reversal)
-judicial disqualification

01-1385 Horn v. Banks
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-1385.htm
summary reversal
-Teague retroactivity

—AFFIRMANCES—

01-283 Utah v. Evans
-Utah and Census

01-721 Robertson v. Bartels

01-1114 Winters v. IL State Bd.
-Ill. redistricting

01-1196 Balderas v. Texas
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/01-1196.htm
(& 01-1242) / — affirmed
-Texas redistricting

—NON ARGUED—

[About CFIF]--[Freedom Line]--[Legal Issues]--[Legislative Issues]--[We The People]- [Donate]- [Home]- [Search]--[Site Map]
© 2000 Center For Individual Freedom, All Rights Reserved. CFIF Privacy Statement
Designed by Wordmarque Design Associates