U. S. Supreme Court
Decisions
2007-2008 Term
American Judges Association
Annual Meeting
Maui, Hawaii
Presented by:
Judge Leslie G. Johnson
1
U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISIONS 2007-2008
I.
First Amendment and related issues
N. Y. Board of Elections v. Torres, 552 U.S.
(2008).
A state judicial appointment system in which appointments are made by political party delegates
elected by party members does not violate the First Amendment association rights of voters and
candidates. 8-1(3 opinions)
Washington State Grange v. Washington State Republican Party, 552 U.S.
(2008).
A Washington state initiative, which provides that (1) candidates must be identified on the
primary ballot by their self-designated party preference; (2) voters may vote for any candidate;
and (3) the two top votegetters for each office, regardless of any party preference, advance to the
general election, is facially constitutional.
Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 552 U.S.
(2008).
An Indiana law requiring citizens voting in person to present government-issued photo
identification is relevant to the state’s interest in protecting the integrity and reliability of the
electoral process.
Riley v. Kennedy, 552 U.S.
(2008).
After the Alabama Supreme Court voided a requirement that vacant county commission seats be
filled by special elections, the governor did not need federal approval to fill a vacant seat on the
Mobile County Commission.
U.S. v. Williams, 552 U.S.
(2008).
A law which makes advertising and promoting images of child pornography illegal does not
criminalize a substantial amount of protected expressive activity because offers to engage in
illegal activities are categorically excluded from First Amendment protection.
Chamber of Commerce v. Brown, 552 U.S.
(2008).
A California law which prohibited employers that received state grants of $10,000 or more in
state program funds per year from using the funds “to assist, promote, or deter union organizing”
is pre-empted by the National Labor relations Act because it regulated employer speech about
union organizing when Congress intended free debate.
II.
Second Amendment
District of Columbia v. Heller, 552 U.S.
(2008).
The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with
service in a militia, and to use that firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, including selfdefense within the home.
2
III.
Fourth Amendment
Virginia v. Moore, 552 U.S.
(2008).
The police did not violate the Fourth Amendment when they made an arrest that was based on
probable cause but which was prohibited by state law or when they performed a search incident
to that arrest.
IV.
Sixth Amendment
Indiana v. Edwards, 552 U.S.
(2008).
States may insist upon representation by counsel for those competent enough to stand trial but
who suffer from severe mental illness to the point that they are not competent to conduct trial
proceedings by themselves.
Rothgery v. Gillespie County, Texas, 552 U.S.
(2008).
A criminal defendant’s initial appearance before a magistrate judge, where the defendant learns
the charge against him and his liberty is subject to restriction, marks the initiation of the
adversary judicial proceedings that trigger attachment of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
Giles v. California, 552 U.S.
(2008).
California ruled that unconfronted testimony of a murder victim was admissible against the
defendant because the defendant killed the victim thereby making her unavailable to testify.
However, the forfeiture rule requires a showing that the defendant intended to prevent the
witness from testifying when he killed her for her unconfronted testimony to be admissible.
V.
Eighth Amendment
Baze v. Rees, 552 U.S.
(2008).
To constitute cruel and unusual punishment, an execution method must present a “substantial” or
“objectively intolerable” risk of serious harm; in light of the safeguards Kentucky’s protocol puts
in place, the risks identified by the petitioners are not so substantial or imminent as to amount to
an Eighth Amendment violation.
Kennedy v. Louisiana, 552 U.S.
(2008).
The Eighth Amendment bars Louisiana from imposing the death penalty for the rape of a child
when the crime did not result, and was not intended to result, in the victim’s death.
VI.
Habeas Corpus
Boumediene v. Bush, 552 U.S.
(2008).
The petitioners have the constitutional privilege of habeas corpus despite the fact that they have
been designated as enemy combatants and are being held at Guantanamo.
Munaf v. Geren, 552 U.S.
55
(2008).
3
Medellin v. Texas, 552 U.S.
(2008).
Neither the ruling of the International Court of Justice that the United States had violated Article
36(1)(b) of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations nor President Bush’s related
Memorandum constitutes directly enforceable federal law that pre-empts state limitations on the
filing of successive habeas corpus petitions.
VII.
Statutory Interpretation-Criminal
Gonzales v. United States, 552 U.S.
(2008).
Express consent by counsel suffices to permit a magistrate judge to preside over jury selection in
a felony trial.
United States v. Ressam, 552 U.S.
(2008).
The defendant made false statements to a customs official in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1001, a
felony, while he was carrying explosives in his car; therefore, he was guilty of carrying
explosives during the commission of a felony in violation of 18 U.S.C. 844(h)(2).
United States v. Santos, 552 U.S.
(2008).
The federal money-laundering statute, 18 U.S.C. 1956 applies only to transactions involving
criminal profits, not criminal receipts.
Regalado Cuellar v. United States, 552 U.S.
(2008).
The federal money-laundering statute at 18 U.S.C. 1956(a)(2)(B)(i) does not require proof that
the defendant attempted to create the appearance of legitimate wealth, neither can it be satisfied
solely by evidence that the funds were concealed during transport.
Bridge v. Phoenix Bond & Indemnity Co., 552 U.S.
(2008).
A plaintiff asserting a RICO claim predicated on mail fraud need not show, either as an element
of its claim or as a prerequisite to establishing proximate causation, that it relied on the alleged
misrepresentations.
Danforth v. Minnesota, 552 U.S.
(2008).
State courts are free to give a decision of the U.S. Supreme Court announcing a new
constitutional rule of criminal procedure broader retroactive application than that given by the
Supreme Court.
VIII.
Sentencing Issues
Logan v. United States, 552 U.S.
(2007).
The “civil rights restored” exemption in 921(a)(20) of the Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984
does not cover the case of an offender who retained civil rights at all times, and whose legal
status, postconviction, remained in all respects unaltered by an state dispensation.
Gall v. United States, 552 U.S.
(2007).
The extent of the difference between a particular sentence and the recommended Guidelines
range is relevant, and the court of appeals must review all sentences-whether inside, just outside,
4
or significantly outside of the Guidelines range- under a deferential abuse of discretion standard;
appellate review of sentencing decisions is limited to determining whether those sentences are
reasonable.
Watson v. United States, 552 U.S.
(2007).
A person does not “use” a firearm under 18 U.S.C. 924(c)(1)(A) when he receives it in trade for
drugs.
Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S.
(2007).
Under United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, the cocaine Guidelines, like all other Guidelines,
are advisory only, and, while the sentencing judge must include the Guidelines range in the array
of factors warranting consideration, the judge may determine that, in the particular case, a
within-Guidelines sentence is “Greater than necessary” to serve the objectives of sentencing. In
making that determination, the judge may consider the disparity between the Guidelnes treatment
of crack and powder offences.
Burgess v. United States, 552 U.S.
(2008).
Because the term “felony drug offense” in 841(b)(1)(A) of the Controlled Substance Act is
defined exclusively by 802(44) and does not incorporate 802(13)’s definition of “felony,” a state
drug offense punishable by more than one year qualifies as a “felony drug offense,” even if state
law classifies the offense as a misdemeanor.
Begay v. United States, 552 U.S.
(2008).
New Mexico’s felony DUI crime falls outside the scope of the Armed Career Criminal Act’s
“violent felony” definition.
United States v. Rodriquez, 552 U.S.
(2008).
The “maximum term of imprisonment…prescribed by law” for the state drug convictions at issue
here was the 10-year maximum set by the applicable state recidivism provision.
Irizarry v. United States, 552 U.S.
(2008).
Any constitutionally protected expectation that a defendant will receive a sentence within the
presumptively applicable Guidelines range did not survive United States v. Booker which
invalidated the mandatory features of the Guidelines, and a sentence outside of the Guidelines
carries no presumption of unreasonableness.
Greenlaw v. United States, 552 U.S.
(2008).
Absent a Government appeal or cross-appeal, a federal appellate court could not, on its own
initiative, order an increase in a defendant’s sentence.
IX.
Business Law
Stoneridge Investment Partners, LLC v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc, 552 U.S.
(2008).
Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 does not provide a private right of action
when a company engages in fraudulent transactions designed to inflate another corporation’s
5
financial statements but makes no public statements concerning those transactions because there
was no reliance on a material representation.
Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc., 552 U.S.
(2008).
The Medical Device Amendment’s preemption clause bars common-law claims challenging the
safety or effectiveness of a medical device marketed in a form that received premarket approval
by FDA.
Rowe v. New Hampshire Motor Transport Association, 552 U.S.
(2008).
Federal law preempts two state laws which (1)specify That a state-licensed tobacco shipper must
utilize a delivery company that provides a recipient-verification service that confirms that the
buyer is of legal age and (2) require that carriers ensure that no tobacco is shipped to unlicensed
retailers.
Department of Revenue of Kentucky v. Davis, 552 U.S.
(2008).
Modern dormant Commerce Clause law is driven by concern about “economic protectionismthat is, regulatory measures designed to benefit in-state economic interests by burdening out-ofstate competitors,” but that concern is limited by federalism favoring a degree of local autonomy.
A discriminatory law is “virtually per se invalid,” but an exception covers States than go beyond
regulation and themselves participate in the market to exercise the right to favor their own
citizens over others.
Quanta Computer, INC. V. LG Electronics, Inc., 552 U.S.
(2008).
Because the doctrine of patent exhaustion applies to method patents, and because the License
Agreement authorizes the sale of components that substantially embody the patents in this suit,
the exhaustion doctrine prevents LGE from further asserting its patent rights with respect to the
patents substantially embodied by those products.
Sprint Communications Co., v. APCC Services, Inc., 552 U.S.
(2008).
An assignee of a legal claim for money owed has standing to pursue that claim in federal court,
even when the assignee has promised to remit the proceeds of the litigation to the assignor.
Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker, 552 U.S.
(2008).
The punitive damages award against Exxon was excessive as a matter of maritime common law.
In the circumstances of this case, the award should be limited to an amount equal to the
compensatory damages.
X.
Retirement Issues
Metropolitan life Insurance Co. v. Glenn, 552 U.S.
(2008).
When a retirement plan grants the administrator or fiduciary discretionary authority to determine
eligibility, a deferential standard of review is appropriate; if the administrator or fiduciary having
discretion is operating under a conflict of interest, that conflict must be weighed as a factor in
determining whether there is an abuse of discretion.
6
Kentucky retirement Systems v. Equal Employment Opportunity Com., 552 U.S.
(2008).
A plaintiff claiming age related disparate treatment (intentional discrimination) must prove that
age “actually motivated the employer’s decision.”
LaRue v. DeWolfe, 552 U.S.
(2008).
502(a)(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 does not provide a remedy
for individual pension losses distinct from plan injuries, but does authorize recovery for fiduciary
breaches that impair the value of plan assets in a participant’s individual account
XI.
Job Discrimination Issues
Sprint/United Management Co. v. Mendelsohn, 552 U.S.
(2008).
In discrimination cases courts should determine whether to admit “me too” evidence on a caseby-case basis because the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not make such evidence per se
admissible or per se inadmissible.
Federal Express Corp. v. Holowecki, 552 U.S.
( 2008).
An EEOC filing (intake questionnaire) will be considered a charge when it could reasonably be
construed as a request for the agency to take remedial action to protect the employee’s rights or
otherwise settle an employee’s dispute with an employer.
CBOCS West, Inc. v. Humphries, 552 U.S.
(2008).
Workers may sue an employer for retaliation under 42 U.S.C. 1981 which gives [a]ll
persons…the same right…to make and enforce contracts…as is enjoyed by white citizens.”
Gomez-Perez v. Potter, 552 U.S.
(2008).
Section 633a(a) prohibits retaliation against a federal employee who complains of age
discrimination.
Engquist v. Oregon Department of Agriculture, 552 U.S.
(2008).
The class-of-one theory of equal protection does not apply in the public employment context.
Meacham v. Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, 552 U.S.
(2008).
An employer defending a disparate-impact claim under the Age Discrimination in Employment
Act of 1967 bears both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion for the reasonable
factors other than age affirmative defense.
XI.
Tax Law
CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Georgia State Board f Equalization, 522 U.S.
(2008).
Under the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act, railroads may challenge state
methods for determining the value of railroad property as well as how those methods are applied
in a given case.
Knight v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 552 U.S.
7
(2008).
26 U.S.C. 67(e) allows trusts and estates to deduct fully the cost of investment management and
advisory services on their income tax returns only if those costs would be unusual for an
individual to incur.
Boulware v. United States, 552 U.S.
(2008).
A distributee accused of criminal tax evasion may claim return of capital treatment without
producing evidence that, when the distribution occurred, either he or the corporation intended a
return of capital.
Meadwestvaco Corp., v. Illinois Department of Revenue, 552 U.S.
(2008).
The Commerce and Due Process Clauses impose distinct but parallel limitations on a State’s
power to tax out-of-state activities, and each subsumes the broad inquiry whether the taxing
power exerted by the state bears fiscal relation to protection, opportunities and benefits given by
the state.
Florida Department of Revenue v. Piccadilly Cafeterias, Inc., 552 U.S.
(2008).
11 U.S.C. 1146(a) affords a stamp-tax exemption only to transfers made pursuant to a Chapter 11
plan that has been confirmed.
United States v. Clintwood Elkhorn Mining Co., 552 U.S.
(2008).
26 U.S.C. 7422(a) and 6511 require a taxpayer seeking a refund for a tax assessed in violation of
the Export Clause to file a timely administrative refund claim before bringing suit against the
Government.
XII.
Civil Statutory Interpretation
John R. Sand & Gravel Co. v. United States, 552 U.S.
(2008).
The special six-year statute of limitations governing jurisdiction in the Court of Federal Claims
requires sua sponte court consideration of lawsuit timeliness issues whether or not raised by
either party.
Ali v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, 552 U.S.
(2008)
In the Federal Tort Claims Act, the broad phrase “any other law enforcement officer” covers all
law enforcement officers, not just acting in a tax, excise, or customs capacity.
Preston v. Ferrer, 552 U.S.
(2008).
When parties agree to arbitrate all questions arising under a contract, the Federal Arbitration Act
supersedes state laws lodging primary jurisdiction in another forum, whether judicial or
administrative.
Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc., 552 U.S.
(2008).
The Federal Arbitration Act’s grounds for prompt vacatur and modification of awards are
exclusive for parties seeking expedited review under the FFA.
8
Richlin Security Service Co. v. Chertoff, 552 U.S.
(2008).
A prevailing party that satisfies the other requirements of the Equal Access to Justice Act may
recover its paralegal fees from the Government at prevailing market rates.
Allison Engine Co., Inc v. United States, 552 U.S.
(2008).
It is insufficient for a plaintiff asserting a claim under 3729(a)(2) of the False Claims Act to
show merely that the false statement’s use resulted in payment or approval of the claim or that
government money was used to pay the false or fraudulent claim. The plaintiff must prove that
the defendant intended that the false statement be material to the Government’s decision to pay
or approve the false claim.
Taylor v. Sturgell, 552 U.S.
(2008).
The theory of preclusion by “virtual representation” is disapproved.
Morgan Stanley v. Public Utility District No. 1, 552 U.S.
(2008).
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission must presume that the electricity rate set in a freely
negotiated wholesale-energy contract meets the “ Just and reasonable” requirement of the
Federal Power Act; a rate set out in a contract must be presumed to be just and reasonable absent
serious harm to the public interest, regardless of when the contract is challenged.
XIII.
Other Significant Decisions
A.
Jury Selection
Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 U.S.
(2008).
While all of the circumstances bearing on the racial-animosity issue must be consulted in
considering a Batson issue, deference is owed to a trial judge’s finding that an attorney
credibly relied on demeanor in exercising a strike, but the judge should give an explanation
rather than simply allowing the challenge.
B.
Native Americans
The general rule that tribal courts do not possess authority over non-Indians who come within
their borders restricts tribal authority over nonmember activities taking place on the
reservation, and is particularly strong when the nonmember’s activity occurs on land owned
in fee simple by non-Indians.
C.
Immigrants
Dada v. Mukasey, 552 U.S.
(2008).
An alien must be permitted an opportunity to withdraw a motion for voluntary departure,
provided the request is made before expiration of the departure period.
D. New Jersey v Delaware, 255 U.S.
(2008).
New Jersey and Delaware have overlapping authority to regulate riparian structures and
operations of extraordinary character extending outshore of New Jersey’s domain into
territory over which Delaware is sovereign.
9