United States v. Ballard, 322 U.S. 78 (decided April 24, 1944): allegation that faith healing advocates knew that their claims of religious belief were false and were used just for solicitation was precluded by Free Exercise Clause; entire mail fraud indictment thrown out even though question of defendants’ good faith in their beliefs was not submitted to jury (this was the “I Am” movement, followers of the late “Guy W. Ballard, a/k/a George Washington, Jesus”)
United States v. Lombardo, 241 U.S. 73 (decided April 24, 1916): any White Slave Traffic (Mann Act) offense can be prosecuted in D.C. because element of offense is failing to mail in registration of woman to immigration office in D.C. (though offense can also be prosecuted in the state where the mailing should have been from)
Ngiraingas v. Sanchez, 495 U.S. 182 (decided April 24, 1990): can’t sue under §1983 in territories such as Guam, just in states (assaulted by police and forced to sign confessions)
Jesner v. Arab Bank, PLC, 584 U.S. --- (decided April 24, 2018): “artificial entities” like (foreign) corporations can’t be sued under Alien Tort Statute (bank allegedly funded terrorism) (so here, a corporation is not a “person”)
Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, 584 U.S. --- (decided April 24, 2018): no separation of powers problem with Patent Office procedure for “inter partes” review (post-patent review sought by outside party which can result in patent being canceled; decision can then be appealed in federal court)
Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318 (decided April 24, 2001): can make warrantless arrest where no “breach of peace” (here, officer noticed driver and children all in front seat without seat belts, and she was also driving without a license and without insurance; defendant’s account makes the officer look vindictive and unprofessional)
Stewart v. Abend, 495 U.S. 207 (decided April 24, 1990): This is actor James Stewart, and the movie “Rear Window”, based on a 1942 magazine short story by Cornell Woolrich, who assigned his rights to the production company (formed by Stewart and Alfred Hitchcock) and promised to renew the copyright and assign the rights to the renewal, but died before the original copyright expired. With dissemination of the movie in the 1980’s in various media, the publisher (which held copyright on the entire magazine issue) sued for infringement. The Court holds that the original copyright (Woolrich’s) is not extinguished when incorporated into a derivative work (the movie).
North Carolina v. Butler, 441 U.S. 369 (decided April 24, 1979): defendant didn’t say, “I waive my right to remain silent”, but (arrested on another charge) refused to sign “Advice of Rights” andagreed to talk; inculpatory statements admissible
Parham v. Hughes, 441 U.S. 347 (decided April 24, 1979): upholding against Equal Protection attack Georgia statute precluding father of child he never formally acknowledged from suing for wrongful death
Hughes v. Oklahoma, 441 U.S. 322 (decided April 24, 1979): Oklahoma statute prohibiting interstate sale of minnows violated Dormant Commerce Clause (apparently there are “licensed minnow dealers”; they’re used for bait -- no not the dealers, the minnows)
Comentarios