A case in which the Court held that a former U.S. President has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority, at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts, and no immunity for unofficial acts.
A case in which the Court held that a former U.S. President has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority, at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts, and no immunity for unofficial acts.
A case in which the Court held that a plaintiff’s Administrative Procedure Act claim “first accrues” under 28 U.S.C. § 2401(a) when an agency's rule first causes harm to the plaintiff.
A case in which the Court held that a plaintiff’s Administrative Procedure Act claim “first accrues” under 28 U.S.C. § 2401(a) when an agency's rule first causes harm to the plaintiff.
A case in which the Court was asked to decide whether Florida S.B. 7072’s content-moderation restrictions comply with the First Amendment and whether the law’s individualized-explanation requirements comply with the First Amendment.
A case in which the Court held that the Eighth Amendment’s protection against cruel and unusual punishment does not prevent a city from enforcing a ban on public camping against homeless individuals.
A case in which the Court held that the Eighth Amendment’s protection against cruel and unusual punishment does not prevent a city from enforcing a ban on public camping against homeless individuals.
A case in which the Court held that 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c), which prohibits obstruction of congressional inquiries and investigations, does not include acts unrelated to investigations and evidence.
A case in which the Court overruled its decision in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council.
A case in which the Court overruled its decision in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council.
A case in which the Court stayed the Environmental Protection Agency’s federal emission reductions rule, the Good Neighbor Plan, for failure to adequately explain its emissions reduction requirements, likely violating the Administrative Procedure Act.
A case in which the Court was asked to decide whether the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act—which requires hospitals receiving Medicare funding to offer “necessary stabilizing treatment” to pregnant women in emergencies—preempts an Idaho law that criminalizes most abortions in the state.
A case in which the Court held that the Bankruptcy Code does not authorize a court to approve, as part of a plan of reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, a release that extinguishes claims held by non-debtors against non-debtor third parties, without the claimants’ consent.
A case in which the Court was asked to decide whether the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act—which requires hospitals receiving Medicare funding to offer “necessary stabilizing treatment” to pregnant women in emergencies—preempts an Idaho law that criminalizes most abortions in the state.
A case in which the Court will decide whether the statutory scheme that empowers the Securities and Exchange Commission violates the Seventh Amendment, the nondelegation doctrine, or Article II of the U.S. Constitution.
A case in which the Court will decide whether the statutory scheme that empowers the Securities and Exchange Commission violates the Seventh Amendment, the nondelegation doctrine, or Article II of the U.S. Constitution.
A case in which the Court was asked to decide whether the government’s requests to large social media companies that they take steps to prevent the dissemination of purported misinformation constituted coercion and thus transformed those private companies’ content-moderation decisions into state action and violated users’ First Amendment rights.
A case in which the Court held that 8 U.S.C. § 666(a)(1)(B) does not criminalize gratuities, i.e., payments in recognition of actions a state or local official has already taken or committed to take.
A case in which the Court will decide whether to approve a consent decree resolving claims among Colorado, Texas, and New Mexico over the delivery of water from the Rio Grande Basin to Elephant Butte.
A case in which the Court held that the Constitution requires a jury trial and proof beyond a reasonable doubt to find that a defendant’s prior convictions were “committed on occasions different from one another,” as is necessary to impose an enhanced sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act.
A case in which the Court will decide whether the denial of a visa to the non-citizen spouse of a U.S. citizen infringes on a constitutionally protected interest of the citizen and, if so, whether the government properly justified that decision.
A case in which the Court held that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), which prohibits the possession of firearms by persons subject to domestic-violence restraining orders, does not violate the Second Amendment.
A case in which the Court held that the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment is triggered when the prosecution in a criminal trial seeks to present testimony by a substitute expert conveying the testimonial statements of a nontestifying forensic analyst.
A case in which the Court held that in a prosecution for drug trafficking—where an element of the offense is that the defendant knew she was carrying illegal drugs—Federal Rule of Evidence 704(b) permits a governmental expert witness to testify that most couriers know they are carrying drugs and that drug-trafficking organizations do not entrust large quantities of drugs to unknowing transporters.
A case in which the Court held that a Fourth Amendment malicious-prosecution claim can proceed as to a baseless criminal charge so long as other charges brought alongside the baseless charge are supported by probable cause.
A case in which the Court will decide whether the probable-cause exception in Nieves v. Barlett can be satisfied by objective evidence other than specific examples of arrests that never happened; and whether Nieves is limited to individual claims against arresting officers for split-second arrests.
A case in which the Court upheld the constitutionality of the Mandatory Repatriation Tax as a valid exercise of Congress’s taxing power under the 16th Amendment.
A case in which the Court held that the U.S. Trustee was not required to issue refunds for the extra fees paid by debtors in certain districts to address the lack of uniformity identified in Siegel v. Fitzgerald; prospective parity is the appropriate remedy.
A case in which the Court held that a bump stock device is not a “machinegun” as defined in 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b).
A case in which the Court held that a bump stock device is not a “machinegun” as defined in 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b).
