Supreme Court Decision Syllabus (SCOTUS Podcast)

US v Haymond (5a 6a, right to jury)

Kisor v Wilkie (Auer deference)

Auer and seminole rock stand.

TN wine & spirits v Thomas (21st Amendment / DCC)

Under the 21st amendment and the dormant commerce clause, Tennessee’s two-year residency requirement for new alcohol sales licensing is unconstitutional. 

US v Davis (void for vagueness)

Holding ”crime of voilence” to be unconstitutionally vague.

Food mktg v Argus Leader (FOIA)

This info is confidential under part 4 of FOIA exceptions.

Dutra v Batterton (Admiralty, unseaworthyness)

Punitive damages are not available for unseaworthiness claims.

Iancu v Brunetti (FUCT TRADEMARK)

PTO can not refuse trademarks on grounds that they are ”immoral or scandalous”.

Flowers v Mississippi (Batson)

Knick v Township of Scott PA (takings)

Williamson co. Is overruled

Rehaif v US (knowingly)

”knowingly” in sec 924(a)(2) means ”knowingly”

Kaestner Trust v NC

NC Can not tax this trust in this instance, based on only state residence.

Gundy v US (delegation of power)

The sex offender registry’s registration of pre act offenders in not an issue of unconstitutional congressional delegation.

McDonagh v Smith (fabricated evidence)

When does the limitations period clock start ticking in re a claim of fabricated evidence.

Am Legion v Am Humanist Assoc. (establishment clause)

The Bladensburg cross may remain.

PDR v Carlton & Harris (unsolicited advertisement)

Remand for consideration of a few things. Support the show (https://paypal.me/SCOTUSsyllabus)

PDR v Carlton & Harris (unsolicited advertisement)

Remand for consideration of a few things.

Manhattan CAC v Halleck (1a)

The Manhattan community access corp, is not a government actor in regards to the 1st amendment right to free speech.

VA Uranium v Warren (NRC/AEA)

A Virginia ban on Uranium mining is upheld.

Gamble v US (sep sovereigns doctrine)

The separate sovereigns doctrine is not implicated by double jeopardy. 

Va House v Bethune-Hill (Standing)

The house is denied standing.

Quarles v US (Burglaries & the ACA)

Quarles’ burglary conviction counts under the Armed Career Criminal act.

Return Mail v US Postal Service (Patent and who is a person)

In this context, Agents of the sovereign (federal agencies) are not “persons” in this section of the AIA.

Parker Drilling v Newton

CA Law needs to fill a gap in federal law to be applicable on the outer continental shelf, under the OCSLA, it can not simply be “not inconsistent”.

Azar v Allina health (Medicare “fraction”)

In re notice and comment when changing substanitive rules. 

Taggart v Lorenzen (Bankruptcies and Civil Contempt)

Vacate and remand, contempt findings in this context require “no fair ground of doubt”.

Ft Bend, TX v Davis (EEOC)

About claim filing rules.

Mont v US (supervised release tolling)

Prisoner does not get credit for his pre trial custody in re his supervised release for another crime.

Smith v Berryhill (SSA Appeals)

Definition of “final decision”

Smith v Berryhill (SSA Appeals)

Definition of “final decision” Support the show

Home depot v Jackson (who can remove to federal court)

Third party counterclaim defendants can not remove to federal court.

Box v Planned Parenthood (Fetal Disposition law)

Explicitly stated not to be case about the right to an abortion, although i’m sure the news media will tell you so. Still have a bit of a sore throat, so apologies on some audible swallowing noises etc.

Nieves v Bartlett (Retaliatory arrest)

Retaliatory arrest claim defeated by probable cause to arrest.  Support the show

Nieves v Bartlett (Retaliatory arrest)

Retaliatory arrest claim defeated by probable cause to arrest. 

Merck & Dohme v Albrecht (Duty to warn/impossibly doctrine)

A clarification on what is considered clear evidence that a drug company could not fulfill it’s duty to warn in light of FDA refusals to allow label changes.

Herrera v WY (Treaty hunting rights)

Bighorn national forest is not “occupied lands” in the context of an 1865 treaty.  Said treaty did not expire upon Wyoming's statehood.  Support the show (https://paypal.me/SCOTUSsyllabus)

Herrera v WY (Treaty hunting rights)

Bighorn national forest is not “occupied lands” in the context of an 1865 treaty.  Said treaty did not expire upon Wyoming's statehood. 

Mission v Tempnology (contracts in bankruptcy)

Breach of a contract under the bankruptcy code still constitutes breach of a contract in this instance.

Cochise v US ex. Rel. Hunt (Relator statute of limitations)

Regarding relators filing qui tam and when is too late.

Tax Board of CA v Hyatt

Nevada v Hall is overruled.

Apple v Pepper (Anti Trust/Monopoly)

Consumers may sue apple for allegedly monopolizing app sales.

Thacker v TVA (TVA Specific)

The Tennessee Valley Authority is not completely immune from suit, but there may be other exceptions.

Lamps plus v Varela (forced class arbitration)

Courts may not use ambiguous wording about consent to class arbitration to force class arbitration even over the idea of contra proferentem.

Bestek v Berryhill (unsupported expert testimony)

Fyi Scintilla means - a tiny trace or spark of a specified quality or feeling. Court declines to create a categorical rule making expert testimony given without REQUESTED supporting documentation invalid in ALJ hearings.

Bucklew v Precythe (Death Penalty)

Bucklew (prisoner) looses this challenge.

Lorenzo v SEC (securities fraud)

Lorenzo can be charged under 10b-5 (a) and (c) even if he does not meet the qualifications to be charged under subsection (b) - as understood through the lens of Janus v SEC.

Sudan v Harrison

Service to a foreign state’s minister of foreign affairs, under FISA can not be to the embassy in the US.

Sturgeon v Frost (Alaska Hovercraft)

The alaska hovercraft case (again). ANILCA doesn’t give the park service authority over navigible waters.

Obduskey v. McCarthy & Holthus (Debt collector v Security interest enforcer)

For purposes of the fair debt collection practices act, enforcers of security interests are NOT debt collectors.

Frank v Gaos (cy pres issue avoided)

Basically a remand to determine standing.

Air and liquid systems v DeVries (integrated parts, and liability)

In this specific maritime context, manufacturers have a duty to warn when they know a dangerous part will, or must be incorporated into their product, and have reason to believe that users will be unaware of the danger.  (Here asbestos).