Willamette Law Online

(17 summaries)

Molly Lehrkind

United States Supreme Court

TitleExcerptFilling Date
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services v. FloridaConstitutional Law: (1) Whether the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is beyond Congress’ powers under Article I because it includes a mandate that individuals must 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.(03-26-2012)
Martinez v. RyanHabeas Corpus: A federal habeas court may excuse a procedural default of an ineffective-assistance of counsel claim when the claim was not properly presented in state court due to an attorney’s errors in an initial-review collateral proceeding.(03-20-2012)
Wood v. MilyardHabeas Corpus: (1) Whether an appellate court has the authority to raise sua sponte a 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) statute of limitations defense; and (2) whether the state’s declaration before the district court that it “will not challenge, but [is] not conceding, the timeliness of [petitioner’s] habeas petition,” amounts to a waiver of any statute of limitations defense.(02-27-2012)
Wetzel v. LambertHabeas Corpus: The Third Circuit failed to assess the state court’s determinations for reasonableness under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). (02-21-2012)
Perry v. Perez, Perry v. Davis, Perry v. PerezElection Law: Whether a district court may order the use of judicially drawn "interim" electoral maps while preclearance procedures, required by the Voting Rights Act, remaining pending.(01-09-2012)
Hardy v. CrossHabeas Corpus: Certiorari granted and the judgment of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Cross v. Hardy is reversed.(12-12-2011)
Judulang v. HolderImmigration: The BIA’s policy for applying §212(c) in deportation cases is “arbitrary and capricious” under the Administrative Procedures Act.(12-12-2011)
Kurns v. Railroad Friction Products CorpPreemption: Whether the Locomotive Inspection Act (“LIA”), which regulates the “use” of a locomotive on a railroad line 49 U.S.C. § 20701, preempts the field of state common-law product liability claims by workers injured in railroad maintenance facilities.(11-09-2011)
Golan v. HolderFirst Amendment: Whether the Copyright Clause and the First Amendment prohibit Congress from removing works that were previously placed in the public domain.(10-05-2011)
Hosanna-Tabor Church v. EEOCEmployment Law: Whether the ministerial exception to employment law litigation applies to an employee of a religious organization whose job duties include secular and religious activities.(10-05-2011)
Maples v. ThomasCriminal Procedure: Whether there is “cause” to excuse a procedural default where petitioner is blameless for the default, the state's own conduct contributed to the default, and petitioner's attorneys of record were no longer functioning as his agents at the time of any default.(10-04-2011)
Douglas v. Indep. Living Center Of S. Ca; Douglas v. Santa Rosa Memorial HospitalPreemption: Whether Medicaid recipients and providers maintain a cause of action under the Supremacy Clause to enforce certain provisions of the Medicaid Act.(10-03-2011)

United States Supreme Court Certiorari Granted

TitleExcerptFilling Date
Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians v. Patchak and Patchak v. SalazarStanding: 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.(12-12-2011)
RadLAX Gateway Hotel, LLC v. Amalgamated BankBankruptcy 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.(12-12-2011)
Hill v. United States and Dorsey v. United StatesSentencing: 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.(11-28-2011)
Mohamad v. RajoubCorporations: (Whether the Torture Victim Protection Act includes corporations or organizations as possible defendants.)(10-17-2011)
United States v. AlvarezFirst Amendment: (Whether the Stolen Valor Act is facially invalid under the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.)(10-17-2011)