October Term 2023

60 opinions

• Department of Education v. Louisiana
  2024-08-16 · 603 U. S. 866 (2024)
• Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors
  2024-07-01 · 603 U. S. 799 (2024)
  6–3 — Jackson, Sotomayor, Kagan dissenting
• Moody v. NetChoice, LLC
  2024-07-01 · 603 U. S. 707 (2024)
  9-0

  The judgments are vacated, and the cases are remanded, because neither the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 11th Circuit nor the 5th Circuit conducted a proper analysis of the facial First Amendment challenges to the Florida and Texas laws regulating large internet platforms.

• Trump v. United States
  2024-07-01 · 603 U. S. 593 (2024)
  6–3 — Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson dissenting
• City of Grants Pass v. Johnson
  2024-06-28 · 603 U. S. 520 (2024)
  6–3 — Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson dissenting
• Fischer v. United States
  2024-06-28 · 603 U. S. 480 (2024)
  6-3 — Barrett, Sotomayor, Kagan dissenting

  To prove a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) , a provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act , the government must establish that the defendant impaired the availability or integrity for use in an official proceeding of records, documents, objects, or other things used in an official proceeding, or attempted to do so.

• Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo
  2024-06-28 · 603 U. S. 369 (2024)
  6-2 — Kagan, Sotomayor dissenting

  The Administrative Procedure Act requires courts to exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority, and courts may not defer to an agency interpretation of the law simply because a statute is ambiguous; Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council is overruled.

• Moyle v. United States
  2024-06-27 · 603 U. S. 324 (2024)
  6–4 — Jackson, Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch dissenting
• Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency
  2024-06-27 · 603 U. S. 279 (2024)
  5-4 — Barrett, Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson dissenting

  The enforcement of the Environmental Protection Agency's federal implementation plan against the applicant states, whose own state implementation plans were determined by EPA to be inadequate because they failed to adequately address certain obligations under the Good Neighbor Provision, shall be stayed pending disposition of the applicants' petition for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and any petition for writ of certiorari, timely sought.

• Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P.
  2024-06-27 · 603 U. S. 204 (2024)
  5-4 — Kavanaugh, Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan dissenting

  The bankruptcy code does not authorize a release and injunction that, as part of a plan of reorganization under Chapter 11 , effectively seek to discharge claims against a nondebtor without the consent of affected claimants.

• SEC v. Jarkesy
  2024-06-27 · 603 U. S. 109 (2024)
  6–3 — Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson dissenting
• Murthy v. Missouri
  2024-06-26 · 603 U. S. 43 (2024)
  6–3 — Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch dissenting
• Snyder v. United States
  2024-06-26 · 603 U. S. 1 (2024)
  6-3 — Jackson, Sotomayor, Kagan dissenting

  Federal law proscribes bribes to state and local officials but does not make it a crime for those officials to accept gratuities for their past acts.

• Texas v. New Mexico
  2024-06-21 · 602 U. S. 943 (2024)
  7-1 — dissenting

  Texas' motion to review the Pecos River Master's determination, that New Mexico was entitled to a delivery credit for evaporated water stored at Texas, as requested under the Pecos River Compact , is denied.

• Department of State v. Munoz
  2024-06-21 · 602 U. S. 899 (2024)
  6-3 — Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson dissenting

  A U.S. citizen does not have a fundamental liberty interest in her noncitizen spouse being admitted to the country.

• Erlinger v. United States
  2024-06-21 · 602 U. S. 821 (2024)
  6-3 — Kavanaugh, Alito, Jackson dissenting

  The Fifth and Sixth Amendments require a unanimous jury to make the determination beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant's past offenses were committed on separate occasions for purposes of the Armed Career Criminal Act .

• Smith v. Arizona
  2024-06-21 · 602 U. S. 779 (2024) · Vacated and remanded
  9-0

  When an expert conveys an absent lab analyst's statements in support of the expert's opinion, and the statements provide that support only if true, then the statements come into evidence for their truth, and thus implicate the Sixth Amendment's confrontation clause.

• United States v. Rahimi
  2024-06-21 · 602 U. S. 680 (2024)
  8-1 — Thomas dissenting

  When an individual has been found by a court to pose a credible threat to the physical safety of another, that individual may be temporarily disarmed consistent with the Second Amendment.

• Gonzalez v. Trevino
  2024-06-20 · 602 U. S. 653 (2024)
  4–1 — Thomas dissenting

  In requiring petitioner Sylvia Gonzalez to provide specific comparator evidence to support her retaliatory arrest claim, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit did not properly apply the principles of Nieves v. Barlett .

• Moore v. United States
  2024-06-20 · 602 U. S. 572 (2024)
  4–2 — Thomas, Gorsuch dissenting
• Chiaverini v. City of Napoleon
  2024-06-20 · 602 U. S. 556 (2024) · Vacated and remanded
  6–3 — Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch dissenting
• Diaz v. United States
  2024-06-20 · 602 U. S. 526 (2024)
  6-3 — Gorsuch, Sotomayor, Kagan dissenting

  Expert testimony that "most people" in a group have a particular mental state is not an opinion about "the defendant" and thus does not violate Federal Rule of Evidence 704(b) .

• United States Trustee v. John Q. Hammons Fall 2006, LLC
  2024-06-14 · 602 U. S. 487 (2024)
  6–2 — Gorsuch, Thomas dissenting
• Campos-Chaves v. Garland
  2024-06-14 · 602 U. S. 447 (2024)
  5-4 — Jackson, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch dissenting

  Because each of the aliens in this case received a proper notice for the removal hearings they missed and at which they were ordered removed from the United States, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229(a) , they cannot seek rescission of their in absentia removal orders on the basis of defective notice under Section 1229a(b)(5)(C)(ii) .

• Garland v. Cargill
  2024-06-14 · 602 U. S. 406 (2024)
  6-3 — Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson dissenting

  The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives exceeded its statutory authority by issuing a rule that classifies a bump stock as a "machinegun" under 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b) .

• FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine
  2024-06-13 · 602 U. S. 367 (2024)
  Unanimous
• Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney
  2024-06-13 · 602 U. S. 339 (2024)
  8-1 — dissenting

  When considering the National Labor Relations Board's request for a preliminary injunction under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act , district courts must apply the traditional four factors articulated in Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc .

• Vidal v. Elster
  2024-06-13 · 602 U. S. 286 (2024) · Reversed
  9-0

  The Lanham Act's names clause which prohibits the registration of a mark that "[c]onsists of or comprises a name, portrait, or signature identifying a particular living individual except by his written consent," does not violate the First Amendment.

• Truck Insurance Exchange v. Kaiser Gypsum Co.
  2024-06-06 · 602 U. S. 268 (2024)
  Unanimous
• Connelly v. United States
  2024-06-06 · 602 U. S. 257 (2024)
  Unanimous
• Becerra v. San Carlos Apache Tribe
  2024-06-06 · 602 U. S. 222 (2024)
  5-4 — Kavanaugh, Thomas, Alito, Barrett dissenting

  The Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act requires the Indian Health Service to pay the contract support costs that a tribe incurs when it collects and spends program income (i.e., revenue from third-party payers like Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurers) to further the functions, services, activities, and programs transferred to it from IHS in a self-determination contract.

• Cantero v. Bank of America, N. A.
  2024-05-30 · 602 U. S. 205 (2024)
  Unanimous
• National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo
  2024-05-30 · 602 U. S. 175 (2024)
  9-0

  The NRA plausibly alleged that former superintendent of the New York Department of Financial Services Maria Vullo violated the First Amendment by coercing regulated entities to terminate their business relationships with the NRA in order to punish or suppress the NRA's gun-promotion advocacy.

• Thornell v. Jones
  2024-05-30 · 602 U. S. 154 (2024)
  6-3 — Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson dissenting

  The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit's grant of habeas relief on Danny Lee Jones's ineffective assistance of counsel claim was based on an erroneous interpretation and application of Strickland v. Washington .

• Coinbase v. Suski
  2024-05-23 · 602 U. S. 143 (2024)
  Unanimous
• Brown v. United States
  2024-05-23 · 602 U. S. 101 (2024)
  6–3 — Jackson, Kagan, Gorsuch dissenting
• Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP
  2024-05-23 · 602 U. S. 1 (2024) · Reversed in part and remanded in part
  6-3 — Kagan, Sotomayor, Jackson dissenting

  Because the district court's finding that race predominated in the design of South Carolina's first congressional district was clearly erroneous, the district court's racial-gerrymandering and vote-dilution holdings cannot stand.

• Harrow v. Department of Defense
  2024-05-16 · 601 U. S. 480 (2024) · Vacated and remanded
  9-0

  Title 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1) 's 60-day filing deadline for a federal employee to petition the Federal Circuit to review a final decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board is not jurisdictional.

• Smith v. Spizzirri
  2024-05-16 · 601 U. S. 472 (2024)
  9-0

  When a district court finds that a lawsuit involves an arbitrable dispute and a party has requested a stay of the court proceeding pending arbitration, Section 3 of the Federal Arbitration Act compels the court to issue a stay, and the court lacks discretion to dismiss the suit.

• Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Assn. of America, Ltd.
  2024-05-16 · 601 U. S. 416 (2024)
  7–2 — Alito, Gorsuch dissenting
• Culley v. Marshall
  2024-05-09 · 601 U. S. 377 (2024)
  6-3 — Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson dissenting

  In civil forfeiture cases involving personal property, the due process clause requires a timely forfeiture hearing but does not require a separate preliminary hearing.

• Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy
  2024-05-09 · 601 U. S. 366 (2024)
  6-3 — Gorsuch, Thomas, Alito dissenting

  The Copyright Act entitles a copyright owner to obtain monetary relief for any timely infringement claim, no matter when the infringement occurred.

• Muldrow v. City of St. Louis
  2024-04-17 · 601 U. S. 346 (2024)
  Unanimous
• McIntosh v. United States
  2024-04-17 · 601 U. S. 330 (2024)
  9-0

  A district court's failure to comply with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.2(b)(2)(B) 's requirement to enter a preliminary order imposing criminal forfeiture before sentencing does not bar a judge from ordering forfeiture at sentencing subject to harmless-error principles on appellate review.

• Rudisill v. McDonough
  2024-04-16 · 601 U. S. 294 (2024)
  7-2 — Thomas, Alito dissenting

  Service members who, through separate periods of service, accrue educational benefits under both the Montgomery and Post-9/11 GI Bills may use either one, in any order, up to 38 U.S.C. § 3695(a) 's 48-month aggregate-benefits cap.

• DeVillier v. Texas
  2024-04-16 · 601 U. S. 293 (2024)
  9-0

  Owners of property north of U.S. Interstate Highway 10 adversely affected by the flood evacuation barrier constructed by Texas should be permitted on remand to pursue their takings clause claims through the cause of action available under Texas law.

• Sheetz v. El Dorado County
  2024-04-12 · 601 U. S. 267 (2024)
  Unanimous
• Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L. P.
  2024-04-12 · 601 U. S. 257 (2024) · Vacated and remanded
  9-0

  Pure omissions are not actionable under SEC Rule 10b-5(b) , which makes it unlawful to omit material facts in connection with buying or selling securities when that omission renders "statements made" misleading.

• Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries Park St., LLC
  2024-04-12 · 601 U. S. 246 (2024)
  9-0

  A transportation worker need not work in the transportation industry to be exempt from coverage under Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act .

• FBI v. Fikre
  2024-03-19 · 601 U. S. 234 (2024)
  Unanimous
• Wilkinson v. Garland
  2024-03-19 · 601 U. S. 209 (2024) · Reversed in part, vacated in part, and remanded
  6-3 — Roberts, Alito, Thomas dissenting

  The Immigration Judge's discretionary decision that Situ Kamu Wilkinson failed to satisfy 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(D) 's "exceptional and extremely unusual hardship" standard for determining eligibility for cancellation of removal is a mixed question of law and fact, reviewable under Section 1252(a)(2)(D) 's jurisdiction restoring exception for "questions of law"; the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit's holding that the IJ's decision was unreviewable under Section 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) was in error.

• O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier
  2024-03-15 · 601 U. S. 205 (2024)
• Lindke v. Freed
  2024-03-15 · 601 U. S. 187 (2024)
  9-0

  A public official who prevents someone from commenting on the official's social-media page engages in state action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 only if the official both (1) possessed actual authority to speak on the state's behalf on a particular matter, and (2) purported to exercise that authority when speaking in the relevant social-media posts.

• Pulsifer v. United States
  2024-03-15 · 601 U. S. 124 (2024)
  6-3 — Gorsuch, Sotomayor, Jackson dissenting

  A criminal defendant facing a mandatory minimum sentence is eligible for safety-valve relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f)(1) only if the defendant satisfies each of the provision's three conditions.

• Trump v. Anderson
  2024-03-04 · 601 U. S. 100 (2024)
  Unanimous
• McElrath v. Georgia
  2024-02-21 · 601 U. S. 87 (2024)
  9-0

  The jury's verdict that the defendant was not guilty by reason of insanity of malice murder constituted an acquittal for double jeopardy purposes notwithstanding any inconsistency with the jury's other verdicts.

• Great Lakes Ins. SE v. Raiders Retreat Realty Co.
  2024-02-21 · 601 U. S. 65 (2024)
  Unanimous
• Department of Agriculture Rural Development Rural Housing Service v. Kirtz
  2024-02-08 · 601 U. S. 42 (2024)
  9-0

  A consumer may sue a federal agency under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681n, 1681o for defying the terms of the Fair Credit Reporting Act .

• Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC
  2024-02-08 · 601 U. S. 23 (2024)
  9-0

  A whistleblower seeking to invoke the protections of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act must prove that their protected activity was a contributing factor in the employer's unfavorable personnel action, but need not prove that the employer acted with "retaliatory intent."

• Acheson Hotels, LLC v. Laufer
  2023-12-05 · 601 U. S. 1 (2023)
  9-0

  Because Deborah Laufer voluntarily dismissed her pending suits under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 , Laufer's case against Acheson is moot.