Supreme Court of the United States
Out of concern for the health and safety of the public and Supreme Court employees, the Supreme Court Building will be closed to the public until further notice. The Building will remain open for official business. Please see all COVID-19 announcements here.

Today at the Court - Wednesday, May 27, 2020


Building closed to the public

  • Out of concern for the health and safety of the public and Supreme Court employees, the Supreme Court Building will be closed to the public until further notice. The Building will remain open for official business. Please see all COVID-19 announcements here.
  • All public lectures and visitor programs are temporarily suspended.
Calendar
Title and navigation
Title and navigation
<<<May 2020><<
May 2020
SMTWTFS
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24
 
2627282930
31      
Calendar Info/Key

 



Recent Decisions


May 18, 2020
         
Opati v. Republic of Sudan (17-1268)
Plaintiffs in a suit against a foreign state for personal injury or death caused by acts of terrorism under 28 U. S. C. §1605A(c) may seek punitive damages for preenactment conduct.



May 14, 2020
         
Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. v. Marcel Fashions Group, Inc. (18-1086)
Because the trademark action at issue challenged different conduct—and raised different claims—from an earlier action between the parties, Marcel cannot preclude Lucky Brand from raising new defenses, including a defense that Lucky Brand failed to press fully in the earlier suit.



May 07, 2020
         
Kelly v. United States (18-1059)
Because the scheme to reduce the number of George Washington Bridge toll lanes dedicated to Fort Lee, New Jersey, morning commuters as political retribution against Fort Lee’s mayor did not aim to obtain money or property from the federal Port Authority, Baroni and Kelly could not have violated the federal-program fraud or wire fraud laws.

         
United States v. Sineneng-Smith (19-67)
The Ninth Circuit panel’s drastic departure from the principle of party presentation constituted an abuse of discretion where the court reached out to decide a question never raised by respondent, namely, whether 8 U. S. C. §1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) is unconstitutionally overbroad.



More Opinions...

Did You Know...

In The Matter Of…


In re  is Latin for “in the matter of.” When cases do not have designated parties, In re  is used followed by the name of the person the case refers to. One case, In re Neagle  (1890), relates to a Supreme Court Justice. A U.S. Marshal, David Neagle, was assigned to protect Justice Stephen J. Field because of ongoing threats against Field while riding circuit in California. In the course of his duties, Neagle shot and killed a man who was attempting to attack Field. The state authorities arrested Neagle and charged him with murder. The Court ruled that the state was required to release Neagle because he was acting under a Federal statute that provided U.S. Marshals had “the same powers, in executing the laws” as state sheriffs and deputies. Justice Field did not take part in this case.

 

 Justice Steven J. Field, c.1871
Justice Steven J. Field, c.1871
Photograph by Freeman Thorp, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States


SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 1 First Street, NE Washington, DC 20543