A case in which the Court held that Florida made a legally sufficient showing as to the possibility of fashioning an effective remedial decree equitably apportioning the waters of the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin (ACF Basin).
A case in which the Court decided that pro-life pregnancy center petitioners were likely to succeed on their claim that the California Reproductive Freedom, Accountability, Comprehensive Care, and Transparency Act violated the First Amendment.
A case in which the Court decided that the district court erred in disregarding the presumption of good faith on the part of the Texas Legislature and improperly reversed the burden of proof in requiring the state to show a lack of discriminatory intent in adopting new districting plans; the Court also held that one of the state house districts at issue was an impermissible racial gerrymander.
A case in which the Court held that it has jurisdiction to review the CAAF's decisions and that Judge Martin T. Mitchell’s simultaneous service on the US Court of Military Commission Review (CMCR) and the US Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals (AFCCA) does not violate the Appointments Clause or 10 U.S.C. § 973(b)(2)(A).
A case in which the Court overruled Quill Corp. v. North Dakota and National Bellas Hess, Inc. v. Department of Revenue of Illinois, holding that states may require sellers with no physical presence in the state to collect and remit sales tax for goods sold within the state.
A case in which the Court held that a miscalculation of a Federal Guidelines sentencing range that has been determined to be plain and to affect a defendant’s substantial rights calls for a court of appeals to exercise its discretion under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 52(b) to vacate the defendant’s sentence in the ordinary case.
A case in which the Court decided that a federal court determining foreign law pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 44.1 should accord respectful consideration to a foreign government’s submission, but the court is not bound to accord conclusive effect to the foreign government’s statements.
A case in which the Court decided that the retroactive application of Minnesota’s revocation-upon-divorce statute, which automatically nullifies the designation of an ex-spouse as the beneficiary of a life insurance policy or other will substitute, does not violate the contracts clause of the Constitution.
A case in which the Court held that a driver of a rental car who has permission to drive the car but is not listed as an authorized driver on the rental agreement has a reasonable expectation of privacy in the rental car.
A case in which the Court decided that a federal habeas court reviewing an unexplained state court decision on the merits should “look through” that decision to the most recent related state court decision that provides a relevant rationale and presume that the unexplained decision adopted the same reasoning, and that the state may rebut that presumption by showing that the unexplained decision most likely relied on different grounds than the reasoned decision below.
A case in which the Court decided that because service advisors at car dealerships are “salesm[e]n . . . primarily engaged in . . . servicing automobiles,” 29 U.S.C. § 213(b)(10)(A), they are exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act's overtime-pay requirements.
A case in which the Court decided that when one of multiple cases consolidated under FRCP 42(a) is finally decided, that ruling confers upon the losing party the right to immediate appeal regardless of whether any of the other consolidated cases are still pending.
A case in which the Court held that that the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 does not strip state courts of jurisdiction to hear claims under the Securities Act of 1933, nor does it permit defendants to remove class actions alleging only 1933 Act claims from state to federal court.
A case in which the Court held that a designation of non-statutory insider status is reviewable under the standard of clear error because the "mixed question" of law and fact at issue is primarily factual.
A case in which the Court held that non-citizens who are subject to mandatory detention under the Immigration and Nationality Act are not entitled to periodic bond hearings. with the possibility of release if they are detained for longer than six months.
A case in which the Court interpreted the parenthetical phrase “not to exceed 25 percent,” as used in 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(d)(2), to mean exactly 25 percent, thereby precluding the district court from exercising its discretion to allocate a lower percentage of the damage award to attorney's fees.
A case in which the Court decided that (1) officers had probable cause to arrest a number of partygoers for unlawful entry under D.C. law under the totality of the circumstances, and (2) that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity because their actions were not clearly unlawful at the time.
A case in which the Court determined that the precedent of Brady v. Maryland does not require that the convictions in this case be overturned because the withheld evidence in question is not material under the standard established in Brady.
A case in which the Court determined that the North Carolina law prohibiting registered sex offenders from accessing various websites, where minors are known to be active and have accounts, regardless of whether or not the sex offender directly interacted with a minor violates the First Amendment.
A case in which the Court determined that the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 allows for commercial notice of a “biosimilar product” to be effective if given prior to approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but that the Act’s notice requirement is not enforceable with an injunction.