303 Creative LLC v. Elenis
It is a violation of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution for a state to compel speech with which the speaker does not agree.
Area(s) of Law:- First Amendment
Groff v. DeJoy
“‘More than a de minimis cost…’ does not suffice to establish ‘undue hardship’ under Title VII.” “Undue hardship” under Hardison “is shown when a burden is substantial in the overall context of an employer’s business.”
Area(s) of Law:- Employment Law
Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College
Under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, schools are prohibited from using race-based affirmative action in admissions decisions.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
Counterman v. Colorado
The State must prove in true-threats cases that the defendant had some understanding of his statements’ threatening nature… A recklessness standard is enough.
Area(s) of Law:- First Amendment
Moore v. Harper
Whether the Elections Clause of the Federal Constitution vests state legislatures with the authority to set rules governing federal elections free from restrictions imposed under state law.
Area(s) of Law:- Election Law
Samia v. United States
Whether the Confrontation Clause bars the admission of a nontestifying codefendant’s confession where (1) the confession has been modified to avoid directly identifying the nonconfessing codefendant and (2) the court offers a limiting instruction that jurors may consider the confession only with respect to the confessing codefendant.
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
United States v. Texas
Challenges to an agency's exercise of enforcement discretion are not the kind redressable by federal courts.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
Arizona v. Navajo Nation
In 1868, the United States set apart a large reservation “for the use and occupation of the Navajo tribe” within the new American territory in the western United States.
Area(s) of Law:- Indian Law
Jones v. Hendrix
A prisoner may not proceed under the general habeas corpus statute simply because of limitations imposed on filing additional alternative postconviction remedy motions. 28 U.S.C. §§ 2241, 2255(h)(1)-(2).
Area(s) of Law:- Habeas Corpus
Pugin v. Garland
An offense may "relat[e] to obstruction of justice" under §1101(a)(43)(S) even if the offense does not require that an investigation or proceeding be pending.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Yegiazaryan v. Smagin
The RICO Act provides a private right of action to “any person injured in his business or property by reason of a violation of” RICO’s substantive provisions. 18 U.S.C. §1964(c).
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Law
Lora v. United States
When a federal court imposes multiple prison sentences, it can choose whether to run the sentences concurrently or consecutively under 18 U.S.C. § 3584. The exception under subsection (c) of 924 provides that, “no term of imprisonment imposed on a person under this subsection shall run concurrently with any other term of imprisonment.” 924(c)(1)(D)(ii).
Area(s) of Law:- Sentencing
Lac Du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v. Coughlin
On appeal, the Court affirmed, holding the Bankruptcy code abrogates sovereign immunity for “governmental unit[s],” which include federally recognized Tribes like defendant. 11 U. S. C. §§ 106(a), 101(27).
Area(s) of Law:- Sovereign Immunity
Smith v. United States
Violations of the Constitution's Venue, Vicinage, and Double Jeopardy Clauses during the course of a criminal trial in Federal court should be remedied via retrial. “[T]he appropriate remedy for prejudicial trial error, in almost all circumstances, is simply the award of a retrial, not a judgment barring reprosecution.” United States v. Morrison, 449 U.S. 361, 364 (1981).
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
Allen v. Milligan
The Gingles framework itself imposes meaningful constraints on proportionality. Forcing proportional representation is unlawful and inconsistent with this Court’s approach to implementing §2.
Area(s) of Law:- Election Law
Dubin v. United States
Under 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(1), a defendant “uses” another person’s means of identification “in relation to” a predicate offense when this use is at the crux of what makes the conduct criminal. [T]he means of identification specifically must be used in a manner that is fraudulent or deceptive.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Health & Hosp. Corp. v. Talevski
A statute creates a §1983-enforceable right when the statute “unambiguously confer[s] individual federal rights. Gonzaga Univ. v. Doe, 535 U.S. 273, 280 (2002).
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Rights § 1983
Health and Hospital Corp. of Marion City v. Talevski
Any law created by Congress which confers rights to individuals may give rise to a cause of action pursuant to 42 U.S.C § 1983 unless doing so "would thwart any enforcement mechanism" of the law. Gonzaga Univ. v. Doe, 536 U. S., 273, 284 (2002).
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Law
Glacier Northwest, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local Union No. 174
On appeal, the Court held that Petitioner’s claims were not preempted by NLRA. Longshoremen v. Davis, 476 U. S. 380, 396 (1986) (The “arguably” protected [standard] . . . is not without substance). Accepting the facts alleged in the complaint as true, Respondent intentionally caused destruction of Petitioner’s property during the strike, clearly failing the “reasonable precautions” test for a strike action to be protected by the NRLA. Bethany Medical Center, 328 N. L. R. B. 1094 (1999).
Area(s) of Law:- Labor Law
United States ex rel. Schutte v. SuperValu, Inc.
The False Claims Act's scienter element refers to the subjective knowledge of the accused, not to the knowledge of an objective reasonable person. Even if a term is facially ambiguous, “either actual knowledge, deliberate ignorance, or recklessness will suffice” to establish knowledge. Universal Health Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Escobar, 579 U. S. 176, 187 (2016).
Area(s) of Law:- Insurance Law
Haaland v. Brackeen
The Indian Child Welfare Act is upheld against constitutional challenges because Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution gives the federal government "virtually all authority over [...] Indian tribes." Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. Florida, 517 U. S. 44, 62 (1996). Anti-commandeering principles do not apply when public and private entities are equally burdened. Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Assn., 584 U.S. ___ (2018) (slip op., at 19–20).
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law