By Oyez
A case in which the Court held that a clause prohibiting class action suits was enforceable even though it would cause costly arbitration.
A case in which the Court found that Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act was unconstitutional.
A case in which the Court found that using the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines at the time of the sentencing for a crime rather than at the time of the offense is a violation of the ex post facto clause.
A case in which the Court found that taking a DNA sample from people who are arrested, but not yet convicted, of a serious crime is not a violation of the Fourth Amendment.
A case in which the Court found that procedural default will not bar a federal court from hearing a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel.
A case in which the Court held that proving actual innocence allows a petitioner to pursue habeas corpus relief regardless of a statute of limitations.
A case in which the Court held that courts should use a common-sense, substance-based approach instead of a formalistic approach when considering the effect of a foreign tax.
A case in which the Court found that under the Privileges and Immunities clause and the Dormant Commerce clause, a state can deny access to its public records to citizens of another state.
A case in which the Court held that even after its authorized purchase, the reproduction and reuse of a seed violated the patent of the seed.
A case in which the Court held that claims against the United States for the intentional torts of prison officials is not limited to violations made during searches, seizures, or arrests.
A case in which the Court found that even though federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over patent law cases, state courts can still hear cases related to patent law as long as that it is not the primary issue.
A case in which the Court found that the courts must apply the Chevron doctrine and defer to an agency's interpretation of its jurisdiction when that jurisdiction is called into question.
A case in which the Court held that the Gonzalez Act made an exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act by saying that a claim of the intentional tort of battery may be brought against an armed forces physician.
A case in which the Court held that the government may not conditionally approve land-use permits unless the conditions are connected and approximately proportionate to the effects of the proposed land use.
A case in which the Court was asked to decide whether a state's failure to fund counsel for an indigent defendant for five years should be weighed against the state in violation of the right to a speedy trial.
A case in which the Court found that a defendant cannot be found guilty of a claim not included in the indictment.
A case in which the Court found that lawyers may use personal information protected by the Driver's Privacy Protection Act to find potential plaintiffs for a group action.
A case in which the Court held that the Fourth Amendment protects against the warrantless taking of a blood sample under exigent circumstances.
A case in which the Court held that a five-year statute of limitations period begins at the time the violation is committed.
A case in which the Court held that federal law preempts North Carolina's state law regarding reimbursement of medical expenses from a patient's settlement.
A case in which the Court held that it was improper to apply the categorical approach in which the courts apply elements of a prior conviction with elements of a generic crime in order to enhance a sentence under the...
A case in which the Court held that a plaintiff in a class action case cannot stipulate that the potential damages are less than $5 million in order to remove the case from federal jurisdiction.
A case in which the Court decided that the return of a child to his or her country of residence pursuant to The Hague Convention, does not make an appeal of that order moot.
A case in which the Court held that the statute of limitations for filing a claim with the Provider Reimbursement Review Board may be extended up to 3 years.
A case in which the Court found that transferring polluted water from one portion of a waterway to another portion of the same waterway did not constitute pollution under the Clean Water Act.
A case in which the Court found that based on the Clean Water Act, a permit is not necessary for storm water runoff because it is not associated with industrial activity.
A case in which the Court held that a collective action suit on behalf of other "similarly situated" employees becomes moot when the individual claim does.
A case in which the Court held that the determination of “plain error” is made during the appellate review, not during the trial.
A case in which the Court held that when a contract is silent on allocation of relief, the parties' intentions are best determined by the common-fund doctrine.
A case in which the Court found state-action immunity does not apply if the state's legislature did not clearly articulate intent to allow anticompetitive activity through the Hospital Authorities Act.
A case in which the Court held that, for purposes of liability for workplace harassment, the definition of "supervisor" is limited to a person empowered to take tangible employment action against the victim.
A case in which the Court held that a covenant not to sue invalidates a company’s counterclaim for trademark enforcement.
A case in which the Court held that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure awards costs to the prevailing party unless a statute explicitly states otherwise.
A case in which the Court held that the Double Jeopardy clause bars a second trial even if the acquittal of the first trial was done in error.
A case in which the Court held that the burden lies on the defendant, instead of the government, to prove withdrawal from a conspiracy regardless of when the withdrawal took place.
A case in which the Court held that during class certification, the court does not need proof of materiality and does not have to allow the defendant to present evidence to rebut the certification.
A case in which the Court found that district courts cannot certify a class without adequate admissible evidence that damages may be measured and quantified on a class-wide basis.
A case in which the Court found that the Padilla rule created an entirely new rule regarding ineffective assistance of counsel and therefore did not apply to persons whose conviction became final before its announcement.
A case in which the Court found that once an individual left the premises after being searched under a legal search warrant, the individual's detainment must be justified by means other than the warrant.
A case in which the Court found that a police officer and narcotic-sniffing dog entering the porch of a home constitutes a search and, without a warrant, is a violation of the Fourth Amendment.
A case in which the Court found that police officers do not need to show evidence of a drug-detection dog's reliability to prove probable cause.
A case in which the Court found that there is not geographical restriction on the "first sale" copyright doctrine.
A case in which the Court held that the respondents lacked Article III standing against FISA because fear of intercepted communication and costs incurred to avoid intercepted communications are not injuries.
A case in which the Court held that the use of race in college admissions is constitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment only if applied with "strict judicial scrutiny."
A case in which the Court found that distribution of small amounts of marijuana does not constitute an aggravated felony and thus, does not require deportation of the distributor.
A case in which the Court held that no right to competence exists during federal habeas corpus proceedings.
A case in which the Court found that an entire claim can be "adjudicated on its merits" even if the federal law claim was not expressly addressed.
A case in which the Court held the Fifth Amendment's Taking Clause could be enacted when a temporary flood regime destroyed property.
A case in which the Court found that the district court, rather than the Court of Appeals, has jurisdiction over "mixed" cases that have been dismissed by the Merit Systems Protection Board.