Court : US Supreme Court
McCleskey v. Kemp - 481 U.S. 279 (1987) U.S. Supreme Court McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 (1987) McCleskey v. Kemp No. 84-6811 Argued October 15, 1986 Decided April 22, 1987 481 U.S. 279 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT Syllabus In 1978, petitioner, a black man, was convicted in a Georgia trial court of armed robbery and murder, arising from the killing of a white police officer during the robbery of a store. Pursuant to Georgia statutes, the jury at the penalty hearing considered the mitigating and aggravating circumstances of petitioner's conduct, and recommended the death penalty on the murder charge. The trial court followed the recommendation, and the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. After unsuccessfully seeking postconviction relief in state courts, petitioner sought habeas corpus relief in Federal District Court. His petition included a claim that the Georgia capital sentencing process was administered in a racially discrimina...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Board of Ed. of Kiryas Joel Village School Dist. v. Grumet - 512 U.S. 687 (1994) OCTOBER TERM, 1993 Syllabus BOARD OF EDUCATION OF KIRYAS JOEL VILLAGE SCHOOL DISTRICT v. GRUMET CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK No. 93-517. Argued March 30, 1994-Decided June 27,1994* The New York village of Kiryas Joel is a religious enclave of Satmar Hasidim, practitioners of a strict form of Judaism. Its incorporators intentionally drew its boundaries under the State's general village incorporation law to exclude all but Satmars. The village fell within the Monroe-Woodbury Central School District until a special state statute, 1989 N. Y. Laws, ch. 748, carved out a separate district that follows village lines. Although the statute gives a locally elected school board plenary authority over primary and secondary education in the village, the board currently runs only a special education program for handicapped children; other village children attend private religious schools, which...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Capitol Square Review and Advisory Bd. v. Pinette - 515 U.S. 753 (1995) OCTOBER TERM, 1994 Syllabus CAPITOL SQUARE REVIEW AND ADVISORY BOARD ET AL. v. PINETTE ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT No. 94-780. Argued April 26, 1995-Decided June 29, 1995 Ohio law makes Capitol Square, the statehouse plaza in Columbus, a forum for discussion of public questions and for public activities, and gives petitioner Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board (Board) responsibility for regulating access to the square. To use the square, a group must simply fill out an official application form and meet several speechneutral criteria. Mter the Board denied, on Establishment Clause grounds, the application of respondent Ku Klux Klan to place an unattended cross on the square during the 1993 Christmas season, the Klan filed this suit. The District Court entered an injunction requiring issuance of the requested permit, and the Board permitted the Klan to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Tennessee v. Lane - 02-1667 (2004) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2003 TENNESSEE V. LANE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES TENNESSEE v. LANE et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the sixth circuit No. 021667. Argued January 13, 2004Decided May 17, 2004 Respondent paraplegics filed this action for damages and equitable relief, alleging that Tennessee and a number of its counties had denied them physical access to that States courts in violation of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), which provides: [N]o qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation or denied the benefits of the services, programs or activities of a public entity, 42 U. S. C. 12132. After the District Court denied the States motion to dismiss on Eleventh Amendment immunity grounds, the Sixth Circuit held the appeal in abeyance pending Board of Trustees of Univ. of Ala. v. Garrett, 531 U. S. 356 . This Co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
United States v. Booker - 04-104 (2005) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2004 UNITED STATES V. BOOKER SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES UNITED STATES v. BOOKER certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the seventh circuit No. 04104.Argued October 4, 2004Decided January 12, 2005 Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, the sentence authorized by the jury verdict in respondent Bookers drug case was 210-to-262 months in prison. At the sentencing hearing, the judge found additional facts by a preponderance of the evidence. Because these findings mandated a sentence between 360 months and life, the judge gave Booker a 30-year sentence instead of the 21-year, 10-month, sentence he could have imposed based on the facts proved to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt. The Seventh Circuit held that this application of the Guidelines conflicted with the Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U. S. 466 , 490, holding that [o]ther than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Massachusetts v. EPA - 05-1120 (2007) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2006 MASSACHUSETTS V. EPA SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES MASSACHUSETTS etal. v . ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY etal. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit No. 051120.Argued November 29, 2006Decided April 2, 2007 Based on respected scientific opinion that a well-documented rise in global temperatures and attendant climatological and environmental changes have resulted from a significant increase in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases, a group of private organizations petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to begin regulating the emissions of four such gases, including carbon dioxide, under 202(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act, which requires that the EPA shall by regulation prescribe standards applicable to the emission of any air pollutant from any class of new motor vehicles which in [the EPA Administrators] judgment cause[s], or contri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
NASA v. Nelson - 09-530 (2011) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2010 NASA V. NELSON SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION etal. v . NELSON etal. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 09530.Argued October 5, 2010Decided January 19, 2011 The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has a workforce of both federal civil servants and Government contract employees. Respondents are contract employees at NASAs Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), which is operated by the California Institute of Technology (Cal Tech). Respondents were not subject to Government background checks at the time they were hired, but that changed when the President ordered the adoption of uniform identification standards for both federal civil servants and contractor employees. The Department of Commerce mandated that contract employees with long-term access to federal facilities complete a standard background check, typically th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Arlington v. Fed. Commc'n Comm'n NOTE:Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U.S. 321. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus CITY OF ARLINGTON, TEXAS, etal. v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION etal. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fifth circuit No. 111545.Argued January 16, 2013Decided May 20, 2013[ 1 ] The Communications Act of 1934, as amended, requires state or local governments to act on siting applications for wireless facilities within a reasonable period of time after the request is duly filed. 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B)(ii). Relying on its broad authority to implement the Communications Act, see 47 U.S.C. 201(b), the Federal Communicati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Wyman v. James - 400 U.S. 309 (1971) U.S. Supreme Court Wyman v. James, 400 U.S. 309 (1971) Wyman v. James No. 69 Argued October 20, 1970 Decided January 12, 1971 400 U.S. 309 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Syllabus New York's Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program, stressing "close contact" with beneficiaries, requires home visits by caseworkers as a condition for assistance "in order that any treatment or service tending to restore [beneficiaries] to a condition of self-support and to relieve their distress may be rendered and . . . that assistance or care may be given only in such amount and as long as necessary." Visitation with a beneficiary, who is the primary source of information to welfare authorities as to eligibility for assistance, is not permitted outside working hours, and forcible entry and snooping are prohibited. Appellee, a beneficiary under the AFDC program, after receiving several days...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
EPA v. Nat'l Crushed Stone Assn. - 449 U.S. 64 (1980) U.S. Supreme Court EPA v. Nat'l Crushed Stone Assn., 449 U.S. 64 (1980) Environmental Protection Agency v. National Crushed Stone Association No. 79-770 Argued October 7, 1980 Decided December 2, 1980 * 449 U.S. 64 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Under 301(b) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to set 1977 effluent limitations for categories of point sources, requiring such sources to meet standards based on application of the "best practicable control technology currently available" (BPT), and 1987 limitations, requiring all point sources to meet standards based on application of the "best available technology economically achievable" (BAT). Section 301(c) of the Act provides for variances from 1987 BAT effluent limitations for individual point sources upon a showing "that such modified requirements (1) will represen...
Tag this Judgment!