Recent Supreme Court Decisions
Musacchio v. United States (January 25, 2016)
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission may regulate wholesale market operators' compensation of demand response bids, even though this inevitably affects retail sales, as long as FERC regulates wholesale rates directly rather than regulating retail sales.
Montgomery v. Louisiana (January 25, 2016)
Retroactive application is appropriate for new substantive rules of constitutional law, such as rules forbidding certain criminal penalties for certain conduct or for certain defendants, since otherwise defendants could face a punishment that cannot be constitutionally imposed. Since mandatory life without parole for juvenile offenders has been declared unconstitutional, these offenders should become eligible for parole.
Menominee Tribe of Wis. v. United States (January 25, 2016)
A party seeking to establish that a statute of limitations should be equitably tolled must show both that he has been diligently pursuing his rights and that extraordinary circumstances prevented timely filing, such that the delay was beyond the party's control. These are necessary elements rather than mere factors for courts to consider.
Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Elec. Power Supply Ass'n (January 25, 2016)
Under the Federal Power Act, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission may regulate the compensation of demand response bids by wholesale market operators, since this use of the agency's power directly affects wholesale rates, does not regulate retail sales, and is consistent with the core purposes of the Act. Thus, the arbitrary and capricious standard is appropriate when reviewing the application of such a regulation.
Amgen Inc. v. Harris (January 25, 2016)
To bring a claim against an ERISA fiduciary based on an alleged breach of the duty of prudence through the use of inside information, plaintiffs must plausibly allege that the defendant could have taken an alternative action consistent with securities laws, and a prudent fiduciary in the same situation could not have concluded that the alternative action would do more harm than good to the fund.
James v. Boise (January 25, 2016)
State supreme courts are bound by the U.S. Supreme Court's interpretation of federal statutes, including those that permit a prevailing defendant to recover attorney's fees.
Most Read Opinions
Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)
Under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, a police officer may use deadly force to prevent the escape of a fleeing suspect only if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)
Under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, a police officer may stop a suspect on the street and frisk him or her without probable cause to arrest, if the police officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime and has a reasonable belief that the person "may be armed and presently dangerous."
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)
The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits states from segregating public school students on the basis of race. This marked a reversal of the "separate but equal" doctrine from Plessy v. Ferguson that had permitted separate schools for white and colored children provided that the facilities were equal.
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)
Under the Fourth Amendment, any statements that a defendant in custody makes during an interrogation are admissible as evidence at a criminal trial only if law enforcement told the defendant of the right to remain silent and the right to speak with an attorney before the interrogation started. The prosecution also must be able to prove that any waiver of these rights was both knowing and voluntary.
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963)
The government's withholding of evidence that is material to the determination of either guilt or punishment of a criminal defendant violates the defendant's constitutional right to due process.
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)
A person may choose to have an abortion until a fetus becomes viable, based on the right to privacy contained in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Viability means the ability to live outside the womb, which usually happens between 24 and 28 weeks after conception.
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961)
The prosecution is not allowed to present evidence that law enforcement secured during a search that was unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment.
Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003)
A Texas law criminalizing consensual, adult homosexual intercourse violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896)
Later overruled by Brown v. Board of Education, this decision embraced the now-discredited idea that “separate but equal” treatment for whites and African-Americans is permissible under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Tinker v. Des Moines School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969)
Since First Amendment protections extend to students in public schools, educational authorities who want to censor speech will need to show that permitting the speech would significantly interfere with the discipline needed for the school to function.
