Court : US Supreme Court
United States v. Leon - 468 U.S. 897 (1984) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984) United States v. Leon No. 82-1771 Argued January 17, 1984 Decided July 5, 1984 468 U.S. 897 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Acting on the basis of information from a confidential informant, officers of the Burbank, Cal., Police Department initiated a drug-trafficking investigation involving surveillance of respondents' activities. Based on an affidavit summarizing the police officers' observations, Officer Rombach prepared an application for a warrant to search three residences and respondents' automobiles for an extensive list of items. The application w as reviewed by several Deputy District Attorneys, and a facially valid search warrant was issued by a state court judge. Ensuing searches produced large quantities of drugs and other evidence. Respondents were indicted for federal drug offenses, and filed motions to suppr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Regan v. Time, Inc. - 468 U.S. 641 (1984) U.S. Supreme Court Regan v. Time, Inc., 468 U.S. 641 (1984) Regan v. Time, Inc. No. 82-729 Argued November 9, 1983 Decided July 3, 1984 468 U.S. 641 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Syllabus Title 18 U.S.C. 474 makes it a crime to photograph any obligation or other security of the United States. But 18 U.S.C. 504(1) permits the printing or publishing of illustrations of any such obligation or other security "for philatelic, numismatic, educational, historical, or newsworthy purposes in articles, books, journals, newspapers, or albums" if the illustrations are in black and white and less than three-fourths or more than one and one-half the size of the original and if the negative and plates used in making the illustrations are destroyed after their final authorized use. Appellee magazine publisher, after being warned that it was violating 474 and 504 by publishing a photographic ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
FCC v. League of Women Voters - 468 U.S. 364 (1984) U.S. Supreme Court FCC v. League of Women Voters, 468 U.S. 364 (1984) Federal Communications Commission v. League of Women Voters of California No. 82-912 Argued January 16, 1984 Decided July 2, 1984 468 U.S. 364 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Syllabus The Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 (Act) established the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), a nonprofit corporation, to disburse federal funds to noncommercial television and radio stations in support of station operations and educational programming. Section 399 of the Act forbids any noncommercial educational station that receives a grant from the CPB to "engage in editorializing." Appellees (Pacifica Foundation, a nonprofit corporation that owns and operates several noncommercial educational broadcasting stations that receive grants from the CPB, the League of Women Voters of California, and an individual list...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Marsh v. Chambers - 463 U.S. 783 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783 (1983) Marsh v. Chambers No. 82-23 Argued April 20, 1983 Decided July 5, 1983 463 U.S. 783 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT Syllabus The Nebraska Legislature begins each of its sessions with a prayer by a chaplain paid by the State with the legislature's approval. Respondent member of the Nebraska Legislature brought an action in Federal District Court, claiming that the legislature's chaplaincy practice violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, and seeking injunctive relief. The District Court held that the Establishment Clause was not breached by the prayer, but was violated by paying the chaplain from public funds, and accordingly enjoined the use of such funds to pay the chaplain. The Court of Appeals held that the whole chaplaincy practice violated the Establishment Clause, and accordingly prohibited the State from engaging i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
PG & E v. State Energy Comm'n - 461 U.S. 190 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court PG & E v. State Energy Comm'n, 461 U.S. 190 (1983) Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission No. 81-1945 Argued January 17, 1983 Decided April 20, 1983 461 U.S. 190 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Section 25524.1(b) of the California Public Resources Code provides that before a nuclear powerplant may be built, the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission must determine on a case-by-case basis that there will be "adequate capacity" for interim storage of the plant's spent fuel at the time the plant requires such storage. Section 25524.2 imposes a moratorium on the certification of new nuclear plants until the State Commission finds that there has been developed, and that the United States through its authorized agency has approved, a demonstrated technology or means for the permanent a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Washington v. Seattle Sch. Dist. No. 1 - 458 U.S. 457 (1982) U.S. Supreme Court Washington v. Seattle Sch. Dist. No. 1, 458 U.S. 457 (1982) Washington v. Seattle School District No. 1 No. 81-9 Argued March 22, 1982 Decided June 30, 1982 458 U.S. 457 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus In 1978, appellee Seattle School District No. 1 (District) enacted the so-called Seattle Plan for desegregation of its schools. The plan makes extensive use of mandatory busing. Subsequently, a statewide initiative (Initiative 350) was drafted to terminate the use of mandatory busing for purposes of racial integration in the public schools of the State of Washington. The initiative prohibits school boards from requiring any student to attend a school other than the one geographically nearest or next nearest to his home. It sets out a number of broad exceptions to this requirement, however: a student may be assigned beyond his neighborhood school if he ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Rendell-Baker v. Kohn - 457 U.S. 830 (1982) U.S. Supreme Court Rendell-Baker v. Kohn, 457 U.S. 830 (1982) Rendell-Baker v. Kohn No. 80-2102 Argued April 19, 1982 Decided June 25, 1982 457 U.S. 830 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT Syllabus Respondent school is a privately operated school for maladjusted high school students. In recent years, nearly all of the students have been referred to the school by city school committees under a Massachusetts statute or by a state agency. When the students are referred to the school by the city committees, these cities pay for the students' education. The school also receives funds from a number of state and federal agencies. Public funds have recently accounted for at least 90% of the school's operating budget. To be eligible for tuition funding under the state statute, the school must comply with a variety of state regulations, but these regulations impose few specific personnel requirements. Simi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Island Trees Sch. Dist. v. Pico by Pico - 457 U.S. 853 (1982) U.S. Supreme Court Island Trees Sch. Dist. v. Pico by Pico, 457 U.S. 853 (1982) Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 v. Pico by Pico No. 80-2043 Argued March 2, 1982 Decided June 25, 1982 457 U.S. 853 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT Syllabus Petitioner Board of Education, rejecting recommendations of a committee of parents and school staff that it had appointed, ordered that certain books, which the Board characterized as "anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Sem[i]tic, and just plain filthy," be removed from high school and junior high school libraries. Respondent students then brought this action for declaratory and injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. 1983 against the Board and petitioner Board members, alleging that the Board's actions had denied respondents their rights under the First Amendment. The District Court granted summary judgment i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1982SC149; 1981Supp(1)SCC87; [1982]2SCR365
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. These writ petitions filed in different High Courts and transferred to this Court under Article 139 of the Constitution raise issues of great constitutional importance affecting the independence of the judiciary and they have been argued at great length before us. The arguments have occupied as many as thirty five days and they have ranged over a large number of issues comprising every imaginable aspect of the judicial institution, Voluminous written submissions have been filed before us which reflect the enormous industry and vast erudition of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties and a large number of authorities, Indian as well as foreign, have been brought to our attention. We must acknowledge with gratitude our indebtedness to the learned Counsel for the great assistance they have rendered to us in the delicate and difficult task of adjudicating upon highly sensitive issues arising in these writ petitions. We find, and this is not unusual in cases of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Pennhurst State Sch. & Hosp. v. Halderman - 451 U.S. 1 (1981) U.S. Supreme Court Pennhurst State Sch. & Hosp. v. Halderman, 451 U.S. 1 (1981) Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman No. 79-1404 Argued December 8, 1980 Decided April 20, 1981 * 451 U.S. 1 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT Syllabus The Developmentally Disabled Assistance and Bill of Rights Act (Act) established a federal-state grant program whereby the Federal Government provides financial assistance to participating States to aid them in creating programs to care for and treat the developmentally disabled. The Act is voluntary, and the States are given the choice of complying with the conditions set forth in the Act or forgoing the benefits of federal funding. The "bill of rights" provision of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 6010(1) and(2), states that mentally retarded persons "have a right to appropriate treatment, services, and habilitation" in "the setting that is least ...
Tag this Judgment!