United States Supreme Court Certiorari Granted Opinions

2018

January 11 summaries

Abbott v. Perez

If jurisdiction is valid, the Court will determine whether the Texas Legislature’s redistricting plan was racial gerrymandering in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the Fourteenth Amendment as a result of voter dilution.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Election Law

Animal Science Products, Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd.

Whether a court may exercise independent review of an appearing foreign sovereign’s interpretation of its domestic law, or whether a court is bound to defer to a foreign government’s legal statement, as a matter of international comity, whenever the foreign government appears before the court.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Corporations

Chavez-Meza v. United States

Whether a district court must explain its decision when deciding not to grant a proportional sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) when the reasons are not otherwise apparent from the record, or is it sufficient that the reduction is issued on a pre-printed form order containing boilerplate language as set forth in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 and the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Sentencing

Lagos v. United States

Whether 18 U.S.C. § 3663A(b)(4) covers costs that were “neither required nor requested” by the government, including costs incurred for the victim’s own purposes and unprompted by any official government action.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Remedies

Lamar, Archer & Cofrin, LLP v. R. Scott Appling

Whether a statement concerning a specific asset constitutes a "statement respecting the debtor's financial condition” within 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Bankruptcy Law

Lucia v. SEC

Whether the appointment of administrative law judges within the Securities and Exchange Commission must comport with the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Pereira v. Sessions

Whether, under the stop-time rule, a notice to appear ends a period of continued residence if the notice does not contain the time and place at which the proceedings will be held.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Immigration

South Dakota v. Wayfair Inc., et al.

Whether the Supreme Court should abrogate Quill Corp. v. North Dakota's sales-tax-only, physical-presence requirement.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Tax Law

Washington v. United States et al.

(1) Whether the Northwest Indian tribes’ right by treaty to “tak[e] fish at the usual and accustomed grounds...in common with all citizens” guarantees that the tribes’ share of the take is “sufficient to provide a moderate living to the tribes”; (2) whether the State may assert equitable defenses in response to the Federal Government’s demand that the state replace hundreds of culverts whose design allegedly violates treaties between the United States and the tribes, when the United States previously mandated the current culvert design (3) whether the Ninth Circuit erred by granted in the United States’ injunction and declaratory relief thus requiring the State to replace hundreds of culverts when the United States showed no clear connection between the replacement of the culverts and an increased take at tribal fisheries.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Indian Law

WesternGeco LLC, v. ION Geophysical Corp.

Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit erred in holding that lost profits arising from prohibited combinations occurring outside of the United States are categorically unavailable in cases in which patent infringement is proven under 35 U.S.C. § 271(f).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

Wisconsin Central Ltd. v. United States

Whether stocks that a railroad issues to employees are subject to taxation under the Railroad Retirement Tax Act, 26 U.S.C. § 3231(e)(1).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Tax Law