United States Supreme Court

Opinions Filed in June 2015

Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission Et Al.

An independent commission adopted by the voters of a state to redistrict maps for congressional and state legislative districts is valid under the Elections Clause in the U.S. Constitution.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Election Law

Glossip v. Gross

The use of midazolam as a lethal injection execution drug does not violate the Eighth Amendment.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Sentencing

Michigan v. EPA

The EPA must consider costs and quantifiable benefits when imposing Clean Air Act regulations on power plants.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Environmental Law

Torres v. Holder

Whether a state offense constitutes an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43) when the state offense is "described in" a specified federal statute.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Johnson v. United States

Imposing an increased sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act's residual clause violates due process.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Obergefell v. Hodges

Same-sex couples have a fundamental right to marry in every state.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

King v. Burwell

Federal tax credits are available to taxpayers who buy insurance on a Federal Exchange.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Administrative Law

Texas Dept. of Housing and Comm. Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc.

Disparate-impact claims, showing discriminatory effect without evidence of discriminatory intent, are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Property Law

City of Los Angeles v. Patel, et al

A city's statute that requires hotels to provide to police their guest registries without a warrant violates the Fourth Amendment.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Evidence

Horne v. Department of Agriculture

Under the Fifth Amendment, the Government is required to pay just compensation for a taking of both real property and personal property. Under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act, the Government cannot regulate the market by taking crops from farmers without compensation.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC

A patentee cannot continue to receive royalties after expiation of the patent, however, parties may use alternative arrangements to achieve similar payment deferral outcomes.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

Kingdomware Technologies, Inc. v. United States

Whether the VA must choose a veteran owned business or whether the VA is allowed to exercise discretion when selecting a contractor?

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Law

Kingsley v. Hendrickson

Under a § 1983 claim, a pretrial detainee must show only that the force used against that detainee was “objectively unreasonable,” not that state actors “recklessly disregarded” detainee safety or “acted with reckless disregard” of constitutional rights.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Rights § 1983

Brumfield v. Cain

If an individual brings up an Atkins claim in regards to their intellectual capacity, and has fulfilled the requirements necessary for a hearing, then they are entitled to present evidence of their intellectual disability to the court.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

McFadden v. United States

Under the Analogue Act, the knowledge requirement is met if the defendant knew the analogue substance was a controlled substance or an analogue, or knew the specific features that made it a controlled substance.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Ohio v. Clark

Introduction of statements by child's teacher regarding an allegation of child abuse do not violate the Confrontation Clause when the primary purpose is not prosecution.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Reed v. Town of Gilbert

A city sign ordinance that is on its face, is a content based restriction on free speech, it unconstitutional under strict scrutiny.

Area(s) of Law:
  • First Amendment

Walker v. Tex. Div., Sons of Confederate Veterans, Inc.

Texas's specialty license plate designs constitute government speech.

Area(s) of Law:
  • First Amendment

Baker Botts L.L.P. v. ASARCO LLC

§330(a)(1) does not permit the court to award attorney’s fees in defending an application for fees.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Bankruptcy Law

Bruce v. Samuels

Whether the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2), limits the percentage of a prisoners income that can be used to pay court fees to 20% of the prisoners total monthly income, or to 20% of the prisoners income for each case requiring court fee payments?

Area(s) of Law:
  • Post-Conviction Relief

Kerry v. Din

A liberty interest in marriage is not violated by not granting a visa to a foreign living spouse.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Reyes Mata v. Lynch

Federal Circuit Courts have jurisdiction to review a denial of an alien's petition to reopen a removal proceeding by the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Immigration

Zivotofsky v. Kerry

The Constitution grants the Executive Branch alone the power to determine national policy on the status or recognition of foreign sovereigns.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Bank of America, N.A. v. Caulkett

A debtor filing Chapter 7 bankruptcy cannot entirely void a junior mortgage under section 506(d) when the value of the home is less than what is owned on the senior mortgage.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Bankruptcy Law

Elonis v. United States

For a person to be convicted under 18 U.S.C.§875(c), the jury must conclude that the convicted person intended for their communication to be a threat to injure another person.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Equal Employment Opportunity Comm'n. v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc.

To prevail in a disparate-treatment claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the applicant need only show that his need for an accommodation was a motivating factor in the employer's decision; actual knowledge is not required.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Employment Law

Mellouli v. Lynch

A lawful alien resident may be deported if convicted of a drug-related state crime only where the drug is a federally regulated substance.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Immigration

Taylor v. Barkes

There is no clearly established Eighth Amendment right to adequate suicide prevention methods therefore, qualified immunity is proper.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Rights § 1983

Davis v. Ayala

Not allowing a criminal defendant’s counsel to be present at an ex parte hearing explaining why potential jurors were excluded is a harmless error.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Back to Top