Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (decided May 2, 1927): the infamous “three generations of imbeciles are enough” case, opinion by Holmes (whose father was an early supporter of Darwin); upholding state sterilization law (procedural safeguards not at issue); never explicitly overruled
Weems v. United States, 217 U.S. 349 (decided May 2, 1910): Philippine Bill of Rights (at that time a territory of the United States) is congruent with our Bill of Rights; statute as to making false entry in cash book requiring twelve years plus of hard labor plus permanent disqualification from voting and from public office is “cruel and unusual punishment”
Montana v. Wyoming, 563 U.S. 368 (decided May 2, 2011): Wyoming can switch method of irrigation consistent with Yellowstone River Compact of 1951 (between Montana, Wyoming and North Dakota) so long as same acreage is irrigated (Wyoming switched from flood to sprinkler irrigation, a more efficient method which resulted in less water being returned to the river for downstream Montana use) (OT, but -- I went across the country to California for law school, and was awakened rudely at 2 a.m. by sprinklers outside the dorm -- what the heck? are they so desperate to have green grass in this semi-desert? if they’d rather live in Connecticut why don’ they move there?? -- it reminded me of what Mark Twain wrote in “Roughing It”:
“One of the queerest things I know of, is to hear tourists from ‘the States’ go into ecstasies over the loveliness of ‘ever-blooming California’. But perhaps they would modify them if they knew how old Californians, with the memory full upon them of the dust-covered and questionable summer greens of Californian ‘verdure’, stand astonished, and filled with worshipping admiration, in the presence of the lavish richness, the brilliant green, the infinite freshness, the spend-thrift variety of form and species and foliage that make an Eastern landscape a vision of Paradise itself. The idea of a man falling into raptures over grave and sombre California, when that man has seen New England’s meadow-expanses and her maples, oaks and cathedral-windowed elms decked in summer attire, or the opaline splendors of autumn descending upon her forests, comes very near being funny. No land with an unvarying climate can be very beautiful. The tropics are not, for all the sentiment that is wasted on them. They seem beautiful at first, but sameness impairs the charm by and by. Change is the handmaiden Nature requires to do her miracles with. The land that has four well-defined seasons, cannot lack beauty, or pall with monotony. Each season brings a world of enjoyment and interest in the watching of its unfolding, its gradual, harmonious development, its culminating graces—and just as one begins to tire of it, it passes away and a radical change comes, with new witcheries and new glories in its train. And I think that to one in sympathy with nature, each season, in its turn, seems the loveliest.”
United States v. Alvarez-Sanchez, 511 U.S. 350 (decided May 2, 1994): 18 U.S.C. §3501, restricting federal court use of confessions made after six hours in custody, does not apply if the custody was on state charges (confession to counterfeiting made after being held for three days on state narcotics charge) (the “silver platter doctrine” out of its coffin!)
Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (decided May 2, 2021): “similar acts" of prior receiving of apparently stolen TV’s from same source was admissible in trial on possession of stolen videotapes to show knowledge that they were stolen
Business Electronics Corp. v. Sharp Electronics Corp., 485 U.S. 717 (decided May 2, 1988): no antitrust violation by supplier who upon request of another supplier stopped selling to plaintiff dealer if no price fixing involved
Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352 (decided May 2, 1983): anti-loitering statute requiring suspect to provide “creditable and reliable” identification struck down on vagueness grounds
Linmark Associates, Inc. v. Willingboro Township, 431 U.S. 85 (decided May 2, 1977): To combat “white flight”, town prohibited “for sale” and “sold” signs. Court holds that this is a First Amendment violation.
Shurtleff v. City of Boston, Mass., 596 U.S. --- (decided May 2, 2022): violation of Free Exercise to not allow organization to fly its “Christian flag” at the one of three flag poles at plaza in front of City Hall reserved for organization staging that day’s events (the other two flag poles show the United States flag and the Massachusetts flag, and on non-event days the City of Boston flag flies on the third pole)
Newberry v. United States, 256 U.S. 232 (decided May 2, 1921): Congress was outside its powers of regulation of federal elections (art. I, §4) when it placed limits on how much a candidate can spend on his primary campaign
Comentários