( 112 summaries )

U.S. Supreme Court Certiorari Granted Updates

<
0 of x
>

Burrage v. United States

Criminal Procedure: (1) Whether the crime of distribution of drugs causing death under 21 U.S.C. §841 is a strict liability crime; and (2) whether jury instructions which allow a conviction by distribution of heroin which "contributed to" death, but was not the sole cause.

(Filing Date: 04-29-2013)

DaimlerChrysler AG v. Bauman

Civil Procedure: Whether a court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a foreign corporation based solely on its relationship to a subsidiary in the forum state.

(Filing Date: 04-22-2013)

Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life Insurance Co.

Civil Procedure: Whether judicial review of the statute of limitations in an Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) disability benefit claim may begin to run before the claimant can bring a legal action.

(Filing Date: 04-15-2013)

Sprint Communications Co. v Jacobs

Civil Procedure: Whether the United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit erred in applying the abstention doctrine to a review a "coercive" or "remedial" state proceeding.

(Filing Date: 04-15-2013)

Atlantic Marine Construction Co. v. United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

Civil Procedure: (1) Whether a forum-selection clause designating an alternative federal forum is enforceable under Stewart Organization, Inc. v. Ricoh Corp., limited to review under a discretionary balancing-of-conveniences analysis under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) and (2) Whether district courts should allocate the burden of proof between parties seeking to enforce or avoid forum-selection clauses.

(Filing Date: 04-01-2013)

Kaley v. United States

Criminal Procedure: Whether the Fifth and Sixth Amendments entitle criminal defendants to a pre-trial adversarial hearing (in which they may challenge the evidentiary support of the underlying charges) on ex parte restraining orders which limit their ability to retain counsel of choice.

(Filing Date: 03-18-2013)

Madigan v. Levin

42 USC § 1983: Whether a state or local employee's claim for age discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is precluded by the Age Discrimination and Employment Act.

(Filing Date: 03-18-2013)

U.S. Forest Service v. Pacific Rivers Council

Administrative Law: (1) Whether a plaintiff has Article III standing if it failed to establish a specific imminent threatened injury from its contact with the forest area affected by United States Forest Service proposals; (2) whether a plaintiff's claim is ripe if it can still object once it identified a specific injurious project; and (3) whether the National Environmental Policy Act requires the United States Forest Service to analyze all potential environmental effects as soon as reasonably possible.

(Filing Date: 03-18-2013)

Walden v. Fiore

Civil Procedure: (1) Whether knowledge that Plaintiff has connections to the forum State constitute “express aiming” for specific personal jurisdiction; and (2) whether venue is established under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) when the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in a judicial district other than the forum state.

(Filing Date: 03-04-2013)

Burt v. Titlow

Constitutional Law: (1) Whether a defendant’s subjective testimony is sufficient to prove that but-for ineffective counsel, she would have pled guilty; (2) Whether the appropriate remedy under Lafler v. Cooper is to resentence a defendant who proves that ineffective assistance led to her refusal to plead guilty.

(Filing Date: 02-25-2013)

Kansas v. Cheever

Criminal Procedure: Whether the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination was violated when the state used a court-ordered mental evaluation to rebut the defendant's expert testimony that claimed the defendant lacked the requisite mental state to commit capital murder due to methamphetamine use.

(Filing Date: 02-25-2013)

Bond v. United States

Preemption: Whether Congress can enact legislation in areas normally reserved to the states in order to implement a valid treaty.

(Filing Date: 01-18-2013)

Chadbourne & Parke LLP v. Troice

Preemption: Whether the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act (SLUSA) precludes a state-law class action alleging fraud and misrepresentation in a Ponzi scheme.

(Filing Date: 01-18-2013)

Metrish v. Lancaster

Habeas Corpus: (1) Whether the Michigan Supreme Court’s decision to abolish a criminal defendant's right to raise diminished capacity as a mitigating defense was “unexpected and indefensible” such that it could not be constitutionally applied retroactively to Respondent's past conduct; and (2) whether the retroactive application of that decision was so lacking in justification that Respondent is entitled to habeas relief.

(Filing Date: 01-18-2013)

Proskauer Rose LLP v. Troice

Preemption: Whether the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act (SLUSA) precludes private class actions where the alleged securities transaction is “more than tangentially related” to the “heart, crux or gravamen” of the alleged fraud.

(Filing Date: 01-18-2013)

Univ. Texas Southwestern Med. v. Nassar

Employment Law: Whether Title VII’s retaliation provision and related statutes require plaintiff to prove discrimination was a “but-for cause” for an adverse employment action or merely a “motivating factor” for the action.

(Filing Date: 01-18-2013)

Willis of Colorado Inc. v. Troice

Preemption: Whether state law class actions suits are precluded under the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act (SLUSA) because a misrepresentation is “made in connection with the purchase or sale of a covered security” where the representation asserts that an uncovered security is backed by safe, liquid, covered securities.

(Filing Date: 01-18-2013)

Salinas v. Texas

Constitutional Law: Whether, or under what conditions, prearrest, pre-Miranda silence is protected by the Fifth Amendment.

(Filing Date: 01-12-2013)

Agency for Int’l Dev. v. Alliance for Open Society Int’l, Inc.

First Amendment: Whether §7631(f) of the United States Leadership against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Act of 2003 (“Leadership Act”), which requires that agencies that receive federal funding to administer foreign HIV and AIDS programs must have a policy explicitly opposing prostitution and sex-trafficking, and endorse the government’s stance on prostitution, violates the First Amendment.

(Filing Date: 01-11-2013)

American Trucking Associations, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles

Preemption: (1) Whether the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act contains an unstated “market participant” exception that allows a municipal governmental entity to act in conflict with the express preemption clause when the municipal entity does not participate in the market and does not have any interest in the efficient procurement of services; (2) “Whether permitting a municipal governmental entity to bar federally licensed motor carriers from access to a port operates as a partial suspension of the motor carriers' federal registration.”

(Filing Date: 01-11-2013)

Hillman v. Maretta

Preemption: Whether the Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance Act (FEGLIA) preempts Virginia’s omitted spouse statute that allows a third party to recover death benefits from the named beneficiary.

(Filing Date: 01-11-2013)

Sekhar v. United States

Criminal Law: Whether a government agent’s "recommendation" is intangible property capable of being extorted under the Hobbs Act and 18 U.S.C. §875(d).

(Filing Date: 01-11-2013)

United States v. Kebodeaux

Constitutional Law: Whether the Sex Offender and Notification Act (SORNA) is constitutional as applied against a person who completed his criminal sentence prior to SORNA's enactment.

(Filing Date: 01-11-2013)

Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl

Indian Law: (1) Whether a voluntary adoption initiated by a non-Indian parent under state law may be blocked by the Indian Child Welfare Act when the Indian parent did not have prior custody; and (2) whether ICWA’s definition of "parent" includes a biological father without legal status as a parent under state law.

(Filing Date: 01-04-2013)

Tarrant Regional Water Dist. v. Herrmann

Water Rights: (1) Whether Congress’ ratification of an interstate compact constitutes “expressly stated” or “unmistakably clear” congressional intent to immunize the relevant state laws from dormant Commerce Clause scrutiny; and (2) whether the compact preempts state laws that limit other signatories’ access to the water in question.

(Filing Date: 01-04-2013)

United States v. Davila

Criminal Procedure: Whether the court of appeals erred in finding that a criminal defendant's guilty plea should be vacated when a judicial participation occurs in violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1), irrespective of individual prejudice to the defendant.

(Filing Date: 01-04-2013)

FTC v. Watson Pharmaceuticals

Patents: Whether reverse-payment agreements between brand-name and generic drug manufacturers are per se lawful or presumptively anticompetative and unlawful.

(Filing Date: 12-19-2012)

Dan's City Used Cars, Inc. v. Pelkey

Preemption: Whether the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act preempts state law on the manner by which a towing company can collect debts secured by a lien.

(Filing Date: 12-07-2012)

Hollingsworth v. Perry

Constitutional Law: Whether it is a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment for a state to use the ballot initiative process to ban marriage between same-sex couples.

(Filing Date: 12-07-2012)

Oxford Health Plans, LLC v. Sutter

Arbitration: Whether an arbitrator acts within his powers under the Federal Arbitration Act or exceeds those powers when allowing class arbitration based solely on parties’ use of broad contractual language in an arbitration agreement.

(Filing Date: 12-07-2012)

United States v. Windsor

Constitutional Law: Whether section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) violates the Fifth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause by defining marriage as "only a legal union between one man and one woman."

(Filing Date: 12-07-2012)

Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc.

Patents: Whether human genes are patentable.

(Filing Date: 11-30-2012)

Mutual Pharmaceutical Co. v. Bartlett

Preemption: Whether federal law preempts state law design-defect claims against generic drug manufacturers.

(Filing Date: 11-30-2012)

Horne v. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture

Constitutional Law: Whether a party may bring a Fifth Amendment Just Compensation Clause challenge in district court prior to exhausting the statutorily prescribed process for obtaining just compensation through the Court of Federal Claims.

(Filing Date: 11-20-2012)

Sebelius v. Cloer

Attorney Fees: Whether a person who untimely files a claim under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is eligible for an award of attorneys’ fees when the claim was brought in good faith and with a reasonable basis.

(Filing Date: 11-20-2012)

American Exp. Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant

Arbitration: Whether the Federal Arbitration Act allows a court to invalidate an arbitration agreement which prohibits class arbitration of a federal statutory claim.

(Filing Date: 11-09-2012)

Maryland v. King

Constitutional Law: Whether the Fourth Amendment allows states to collect and analyze DNA from persons arrested for violent crimes who have been charged but not convicted.

(Filing Date: 11-09-2012)

Peugh v. United States

Sentencing: Whether a court violates the Constitution's ex post facto clause by retroactively applying current sentencing guidelines to past crimes when the result is a harsher sentence.

(Filing Date: 11-09-2012)

Shelby County, Ala. v. Holder

Constitutional Law: "Whether Congress' decision in 2006 to reauthorize Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act under the pre-existing coverage formula of Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act exceeded its authority under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments and thus violated the Tenth Amendment and Article IV of the United States Constitution."

(Filing Date: 11-09-2012)

Bullock v. BankChampaign

Bankruptcy Law: Whether §523(a)(4) of the Bankruptcy Code requires a showing of “extreme recklessness” or merely “objective recklessness” to constitute defalcation.

(Filing Date: 10-29-2012)

McQuiggin v. Perkins

Habeas Corpus: Whether a prisoner claiming actual innocence when petitioning for a writ of habeas corpus must do so with "reasonable diligence."

(Filing Date: 10-29-2012)

PPL Corp. v. CIR

Tax Law: Whether courts should apply a formalistic or substance-based approach when determining the creditability of foreign tax credits.

(Filing Date: 10-29-2012)

Trevino v. Thaler

Habeas Corpus: Whether a state court procedural defect acts to bar a federal habeas court from hearing a substantial claim of ineffective assistance at trial.

(Filing Date: 10-29-2012)

Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council

Preemption: (1) Whether the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit erred when it applied a heightened preemption test under the Elections Clause instead of applying the more traditional preemption analysis under the Supremacy Clause; and (2) whether the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit erred in holding that the National Voter Registration Act preempted an Arizona law requiring proof of eligibility to register to vote.

(Filing Date: 10-15-2012)

Alleyne v. United States

Sentencing: Whether Harris v. United States, which held that the Constitution does not require facts which increase a mandatory minimum sentence to be determined by a jury, should be overruled.

(Filing Date: 10-05-2012)

Bowman v. Monsanto

Patents: Whether patents on seeds containing self-replicating technology are exhausted after an authorized sale.

(Filing Date: 10-05-2012)

Boyer v. Louisiana

Constitutional Law: Whether a five-year delay due to a state funding crisis for indigent defendants counts against the state for speedy trial purposes.

(Filing Date: 10-05-2012)

Cable, Telecommunications, and Technology Committee v. FCC

Administrative Law: Whether a Chevron analysis is appropriate for reviewing an administrative agency's interpretation of its own jurisdiction.

(Filing Date: 10-05-2012)

Gunn v. Minton

Civil Procedure: Whether federal courts possess exclusive subject-matter jurisdiction over state-based legal malpractice claims that require application of federal patent law.

(Filing Date: 10-05-2012)

Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt.

Property Law: Whether an "exactions taking" occurs under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution when the government actor does not compel dedication of any interest in the real property to the public use, and when the alleged exaction consists of imposition of a monetary obligation as a condition of permit issuance but the permit is never issued.

(Filing Date: 10-05-2012)

McBurney v. Young

Constitutional Law: Whether the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, which limits the right of access to public documents to Virginia citizens, violates the Constitution's Privileges and Immunities and dormant commerce clauses.

(Filing Date: 10-05-2012)

Delia v. E.M.A.

Preemption: Whether the Medicaid Act’s anti-lien provision preempts a North Carolina statute allowing the Department of Health and Human Services to place liens on settlement proceeds.

(Filing Date: 09-25-2012)

Gabelli v. Securities and Exchange Commission

Civil Procedure: Whether the five-year limitations period under 28 U.S.C. § 2462 is calculated from the date of the underlying infraction or from when the government actually—or should have—discovered the fraud when there are no additional legislative controlling provisions.

(Filing Date: 09-25-2012)

Levin v. United States

Tort Law: Whether the United States and individual military personnel acting within the scope of their employment can be sued for the common law tort of battery.

(Filing Date: 09-25-2012)

Maracich v. Spears

Professional Responsibility: Whether lawyers may use personal information protected by the Driver's Privacy Protection Act to investigate and solicit potential clients for a class action litigation or whether such use falls outside the permissible scope of the litigation exception.

(Filing Date: 09-25-2012)

Millbrook v. United States

Tort Law: Whether 28 U.S.C. §§1346(b) and 2680(h) waive the sovereign immunity of the United States for intentional torts committed by prison guards who are acting within the scope of their employment but are not exercising authority to "execute searches, to seize evidence or to make arrests for violations of Federal law."

(Filing Date: 09-25-2012)

Missouri v. McNeely

Criminal Procedure: Whether evidence obtained by a nonconsensual and warrantless blood sample from a drunk driver is admissible under the exigent circumstances exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement based upon the natural dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream.

(Filing Date: 09-25-2012)

Descamps v. United States

Sentencing: Whether a state conviction under a modified statute that is missing an element of the generic crime may be used to enhance sentencing under the Armed Career Criminal Act.

(Filing Date: 09-06-2012)

The Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Knowles

Civil Procedure: Whether a class action plaintiff's stipulation limiting damages to below the federal amount in controversy threshold, made to defeat defendant's right of removal under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, is binding on absent class members.

(Filing Date: 08-31-2012)

Chafin v. Chafin

Standing: Whether an appeal of a ruling on a petition for Return of Children under the Hague Convention becomes moot when the child at issue returns to his or her own country of habitual residence.

(Filing Date: 08-13-2012)

Already, LLC v. Nike, Inc.

Constitutional Law: Whether a covenant not to sue deprives a defendant of a counterclaim due to loss of Article III subject matter jurisdiction since there is no case or controversy for the court to rule on.

(Filing Date: 06-25-2012)

American Tradition Partnership v. Bullock

Constitutional Law: A state ban on independent political expenditures from corporate general treasuries unduly burdens First Amendment rights.

(Filing Date: 06-25-2012)

Comcast Corp. v. Behrend

: Whether district courts may certify class actions without first resolving whether the class has introduced admissible evidence—including expert testimony—to establish the case is susceptible to an award of damages on a class-wide basis in satisfaction of the predominance requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23.

(Filing Date: 06-25-2012)

FTC v. Phoebe Putney Health System, Inc.

Corporations: (1) Whether the Georgia legislature “clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed [a] state policy to displace competition” when it vested powers to acquire and lease hospitals; if so (2) whether such policy is sufficient to validate anticompetitive conduct given minimal state involvement with a leased hospital.

(Filing Date: 06-25-2012)

Genesis HealthCare Corp. v. Symczyk

Constitutional Law: Whether Article III’s Case or Controversy Clause moots an action when the plaintiff receives an offer that satisfies all of plaintiff's claims.

(Filing Date: 06-25-2012)

Georgia-Pacific West, Inc. v. Northwest Environmental Defense Center & Decker v. Northwest Environmental Defense Center

Environmental Law: Whether the Ninth Circuit erred when it rejected the EPA’s position that runoff from forest roads does not require a permit and mandated that the EPA regulate such runoff as industrial stormwater subject to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).

(Filing Date: 06-25-2012)

Henderson v. United States

Criminal Procedure: Whether an error can be "plain error” under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 52(b), when a law that was previously unsettled becomes settled during subsequent appeal.

(Filing Date: 06-25-2012)

Los Angeles County Flood Control District v. Natural Resources Defense Council

Environmental Law: Whether water that flows from one point in a navigable waterway, through a man-made channel, and back into the same river, can be considered a "discharge" from an "outfall" under the Clean Water Act.

(Filing Date: 06-25-2012)

Sebelius v. Auburn Regional Medical Center

Civil Procedure: Whether the 180-day statutory time limit for filing an appeal with the Provider Reimbursement Review Board from a final Medicare payment determination made by the PRRB is subject to equitable tolling.

(Filing Date: 06-25-2012)

US Airways, Inc. v. McCutchen

Employment Law: Whether § 502(a)(3) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) authorizes courts to use equitable principles to rewrite contractual language and refuse to order participants to reimburse their plan for benefits paid even when the plan’s terms give it an absolute right to full reimbursement.

(Filing Date: 06-25-2012)

Vance v. Ball State University

Employment Law: Whether "supervisor" liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 applies to harassment by individuals the employer has vested with authority to direct and oversee alleged victims’ work, or is limited to individuals who are empowered to “hire, fire, demote, promote, transfer, or discipline” the alleged victim.

(Filing Date: 06-25-2012)

Smith v. United States

Criminal Law: Whether the defendant bears the burden of proving withdrawal from a conspiracy or whether the burden shifts to the government once the defendant meets the burden of production to show withdrawal from the conspiracy.

(Filing Date: 06-18-2012)

Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds

Civil Procedure: Whether a court must require proof of materiality or allow evidence rebutting the applicability of the fraud-on-the-market theory before certifying a class based on that theory.

(Filing Date: 06-11-2012)

Evans v. Michigan

Constitutional Law: Whether an erroneously granted directed verdict, based on the prosecution’s failure to prove a non-existent element of the crime is an acquittal subject to the double-jeopardy provisions of the United States and state constitutions.

(Filing Date: 06-11-2012)

Bailey v. United States

Criminal Procedure: Whether Michigan v. Summers, 452 U.S. 692 (1981) allows police officers executing a search warrant to detain an individual who left the premises before the warrant was executed.

(Filing Date: 06-04-2012)

Marx v. General Revenue Corp.

Civil Procedure: Whether (1) a facsimile from a debt collection agency to a third party regarding a consumer's employment information constitutes a communication and is therefore in violation of the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA) and (2) the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure permitting award of costs to a prevailing party is superseded by the cost provision of the FDCPA.

(Filing Date: 05-29-2012)

Clapper v. Amnesty Int'l USA

Standing: Whether a belief that legislation might result in future injury coupled with the funds expended in an effort to prevent that future injury is sufficient to meet the injury in fact requirement for Article III standing.

(Filing Date: 05-21-2012)

Chaidez v. United States

Criminal Procedure: Whether the rule announced in Padilla v. Kentucky—that an attorney provides ineffective assistance of counsel in violation of the Sixth Amendment by failing to inform a criminal defendant that a guilty plea carries a risk of deportation—applies retroactively to persons whose convictions were already final.

(Filing Date: 04-30-2012)

Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Copyright: Whether the Copyright Act's "first sale doctrine" freely permits resale of foreign works legally purchased overseas and imported into the United States as the Third Circuit has held, or if such works can only be resold after the copyright holder explicitly approves the sale as the Second Circuit has held, or if they can only be resold after the copyright holder approves an earlier sale as the Ninth Circuit has held.

(Filing Date: 04-16-2012)

Arkansas Game & Fish Commission v. United States

Constitutional Law: Whether a physical invasion must be permanent in order to constitute a taking under the Fifth Amendment.

(Filing Date: 04-02-2012)

Moncrieffe v. Holder

Immigration: Whether the government bears the burden of proving a defendant was convicted of a drug trafficking charge that would constitute a federal felony in order to justify removal as an aggravated felon under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).

(Filing Date: 04-02-2012)

Florida v. Harris

Criminal Procedure: Whether an alert by a narcotics detection dog is sufficient to establish probable cause to search a vehicle.

(Filing Date: 03-26-2012)

Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action

Constitutional Law: "Whether a state violates the Equal Protection Clause by amending its constitution to prohibit race- and sex-based discrimination or preferential treatment in public-university admissions decisions."

(Filing Date: 03-25-2012)

United States v. Woods

Tax Law: “(1) Whether Section 6662 of the Internal Revenue Code, which prescribes a penalty for an underpayment of federal income tax that is “attributable to” an overstatement of basis in property, applies to an underpayment resulting from a determination that a transaction lacks economic substance because the sole purpose of the transaction was to generate a tax loss by artificially inflating the taxpayer’s basis in property. (2) Whether the district court had jurisdiction in this case under 26 U.S.C. §6226 to consider the substantial valuation misstatement penalty.”

(Filing Date: 03-25-2012)

Ryan v. Gonzalez

Habeas Corpus: Whether an indigent death row inmate is entitled to stay the federal habeas proceedings he initiated if he is not competent to assist counsel.

(Filing Date: 03-19-2012)

Tibbals v. Carter

Habeas Corpus: Whether a prisoner who has been sentenced to death has a "right to competence" and if so whether a federal court may stay habeas proceedings indefinitely.

(Filing Date: 03-19-2012)

Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.

Corporations: (1) Whether the question of corporate civil tort liability under the Alien Tort Statute (“ATS”), 28 U.S.C. §1350, is a question of merits or one of subject matter jurisdiction; and (2) whether, like any other private party, a corporation may be held liable under the ATS for committing a tort, such as torture or genocide, in violation of the law of nations, or whether it is immune from liability.

(Filing Date: 02-28-2012)

Fisher v. University of Texas

Constitutional Law: Whether including race as a factor in determining undergraduate admissions was a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

(Filing Date: 02-21-2012)

Lozman v. The City of Riviera Beach, Florida

Admiralty: Whether a floating structure that is indefinitely moored, receives power and other utilities from shore, and is not intended to be used in maritime transportation or commerce, constitutes a “vessel” under 1 U.S.C. § 3, thus triggering federal maritime jurisdiction.

(Filing Date: 02-21-2012)

Taniguchi v. Kan Pacific Saipan

Civil Procedure: (Whether an award of costs for interpretation includes costs for translation of documents.)

(Filing Date: 02-21-2012)

Sandifer v. United States Steel Corp.

Employment Law: Whether donning and doffing safety clothing falls within the meaning of “changing clothes” in Section 203(o) of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

(Filing Date: 02-19-2012)

Sandifer v. United States Steel Corp.

Employment Law: Whether donning and doffing safety clothing falls within the meaning of “changing clothes” in Section 203(o) of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

(Filing Date: 02-19-2012)

Johnson v. Williams

Habeas Corpus: (1)Whether a habeas petitioner's claim has been “adjudicated on the merits” for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); and (2) whether, under § 2254, a federal habeas court (a) may grant relief on the ground that the petitioner had a Sixth Amendment right to retain a biased juror on the panel and (b) may reject a state court’s finding of juror bias because it disagrees with the finding and the reasons stated for it, even where the finding was rationally supported by evidence in the state-court record.

(Filing Date: 01-17-2012)

Kloeckner v. Solis

Administrative Law: Whether the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has sole subject matter jurisdiction over an appeal from a ruling by the Merit Systems Protection Board when the case includes both discrimination and unlawful termination claims.

(Filing Date: 01-17-2012)

United States v. Bormes

Sovereign Immunity: Whether the Little Tucker Act (LTA), 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(2), waives sovereign immunity of the United States with respect to damages actions for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.

(Filing Date: 01-17-2012)

Florida v. Jardines

Criminal Procedure: Whether a trained narcotics detection dog's sniff at a suspected grow house's front door is a Fourth Amendment search requiring probable cause.

(Filing Date: 01-06-2012)

Arizona v. United States

Preemption: Whether an Arizona immigration law is preempted by federal law, specifically the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

(Filing Date: 12-12-2011)

Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians v. Patchak and Patchak v. Salazar

Standing: Whether a private individual who alleges injuries resulting from the operation of a gaming facility on Indian trust land has standing to challenge a decision of the Secretary of the Interior to take title to that land in trust, on the ground that the decision was not authorized by the Indian Reorganization Act, and (2) whether a suit of that nature is an action under the Quiet Title Act, which supplants section 702 of the Administrative Procedures Act’s waiver of sovereign immunity.

(Filing Date: 12-12-2011)

RadLAX Gateway Hotel, LLC v. Amalgamated Bank

Bankruptcy Law: Whether a debtor may pursue a Chapter 11 plan that proposes to sell assets free of liens without allowing the secured creditor to credit bid, but instead providing it with the indubitable equivalent of its claim under Section 1129(b)(2)(A)(iii) of the Bankruptcy Code.

(Filing Date: 12-12-2011)

F.A.A. v. Cooper

Civil Procedure: Whether a plaintiff who alleges only mental and emotional injuries can establish actual damages within the meaning of the civil remedies provision of the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a(g)(4)(A).

(Filing Date: 11-30-2011)

Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp. (11-204)

Administrative Law: (1) Whether deference is owed to the to the Secretary of Labor’s interpretation of the Fair Labor Standards Act’s sales exemption; and (2)whether the FLSA’s outside sale exemption applies to pharmaceutical sales representatives.

(Filing Date: 11-28-2011)

Hill v. United States and Dorsey v. United States

Sentencing: Whether the Fair Sentencing Act applies in a sentencing proceeding that takes place on or after the statute’s effective date when the underlying offense occurred prior to that date.

(Filing Date: 11-28-2011)

Southern Union Co. v. U.S.

Sentencing: Whether the Apprendi requirement, which requires any fact, other than a prior conviction, that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum be submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt, applies to criminal fines.

(Filing Date: 11-28-2011)

Armour v. Indianapolis

Constitutional Law: Whether the City of Indianapolis violated the 14th Amendment by forgiving outstanding assessments for some property owners while not offering refunds for others who had paid in full.

(Filing Date: 11-14-2011)

Astrue v. Capato

Administrative Law: Whether a child conceived after his biological father's death and prohibited by state intestacy law from inheriting personal property is nonetheless eligible for child survivor benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act.

(Filing Date: 11-14-2011)

Florida v. Department of Health and Human Services

Constitutional Law: Whether the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's expansion of the Medicaid law exceeds Congress's power under the Spending Clause of Article I.

(Filing Date: 11-14-2011)

National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius

Constitutional Law: Whether the entire Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act must be invalidated because its mandate requiring individuals to obtain health insurance is nonseverable from the remainder of the Act.

(Filing Date: 11-14-2011)

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services v. Florida

Constitutional Law: (1) Whether the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is beyond Congress’ Article I power because it includes a mandate for individuals to obtain health insurance or pay a monetary fine; and (2) Whether the Anti-Injunction Act, 26 U.S.C. §7421(a), bars suits by challengers to the Act.

(Filing Date: 11-14-2011)