Volume 518 — United States Reports

This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 518 of the United States Reports:

On trial for two counts of deliberate homicide-defined by Montana law as "purposely" or "knowingly" causing another's death-respondent claimed that extreme intoxication had rendered him physically incapable of committing the murders and accounted for his inability to recall the events of the night in question. After being instructed, pursuant to Mont. Code Ann.

After petitioners, Los Angeles police officers, were acquitted on state charges of assault and excessive use of force in the beating of a suspect during an arrest, they were convicted under 18 U. S. C. Section(s) 242 of violating the victim's constitutional rights under color of law.

After agreeing with others to buy cocaine, petitioner was charged with a conspiracy violative of 21 U. S. C. Section(s) 846, which carries a statutory minimum sentence of 10 years' imprisonment.

At the start of petitioner's Virginia trial for the capital murder of Richard McClelland, the prosecution acknowledged that, should the trial reach the penalty phase, it would introduce petitioner's admissions to other inmates that he had previously murdered Lisa Sorrell and her daughter.

Respondents terminated petitioner Lane's enrollment at the United States Merchant Marine Academy on the ground that his recently diagnosed diabetes mellitus rendered him ineligible to be commissioned for service in the Navy/Merchant Marine Reserve Program or as a Naval Reserve Officer.

* The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 obligated CF & I Steel Corporation and its subsidiaries (CF & I) to make certain annual funding contributions to pension plans they sponsored. Held: The ''tax'' under § 4971(a) was not entitled to seventh priority as an ''excise tax'' under § 507(a)(7)(E), but instead is, for bankruptcy purposes, a penalty to be dealt with as an ordinary, unsecured claim. Pp. ___-___.

After their collective-bargaining agreement expired, the National Football League (NFL), a group of football clubs, and the NFL Players Association, a labor union, began to negotiate a new contract. The NFL presented a plan that would permit each club to establish a "developmental squad" of substitute players, each of whom would be paid the same $1,000 weekly salary. The union disagreed, insisting that individual squad members should be free to negotiate their own salaries.

United States v. Ursery, 518 U.S. 267 (1996), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that in rem civil forfeitures are not "punishment" for purposes of the Double Jeopardy Clause.

Petitioner was charged with two counts of obstructing the mail, each charge carrying a maximum authorized prison sentence of six months. He requested a jury, but the magistrate judge ordered a bench trial, explaining that because she would not sentence him to more than six months' imprisonment, he was not entitled to a jury trial. The District Court affirmed.

Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343 (1996), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that Bounds v. Smith did not create an abstract, freestanding right for incarcerated people to access a law library or legal assistance.

Gasperini v. Center for Humanities, 518 U.S. 415 (1996), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court further refined the Erie doctrine regarding when and how federal courts are to apply state law in cases brought under diversity jurisdiction. The Court held that the New York state rule applied.

Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr, 518 U.S. 470 (1996), is a United States Supreme Court case dealing with the scope of federal preemption.

United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996), is a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States struck down the long-standing male-only admission policy of the Virginia Military Institute (VMI) in a 7–1 decision. Justice Clarence Thomas, whose son was enrolled at the university at the time, recused himself.

Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee v. FEC, 518 U.S. 604 (1996), was a Supreme Court of the United States case in which the Colorado Republican Party challenged the Federal Election Commission (FEC) as to whether the "Party Expenditure Provision" of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA) violated the First Amendment right to free speech. This provision put a limit on the amount of money a national party could spend on a congressional candidate's campaign. The FEC argued that the Committee violated this provision when purchasing a radio advertisement that attacked the likely candidate of the Colorado Democratic Party.

After he was convicted of murder and other crimes and sentenced to death by a Georgia state court, petitioner was denied relief on direct appeal, in two rounds of state collateral proceedings, and in a first round of federal habeas corpus proceedings.

During the term of his at-will contract with Wabaunsee County, Kansas (County), to haul trash, respondent Umbehr was an outspoken critic of petitioner Board of County Commissioners (Board). After the commissioners voted to terminate (or prevent the automatic renewal of) the contract, allegedly because they took Umbehr 's criticism badly, he brought this suit against two of them under 42 U. S. C. Section(s) 1983.

Respondent city maintains a rotation list of available companies to perform towing services at its request. Until the events recounted here, the city's policy had been to remove companies from the list only for cause. Petitioner O'Hare Truck Service, Inc., was removed from the list after its owner, petitioner Gratzianna, refused to contribute to respondent mayor's reelection campaign and instead supported his opponent.

Denver Area Educational Telecommunications Consortium v. Federal Communications Commission, 518 U.S. 727 (1996), was a 1996 United States Supreme Court case concerning the constitutionality of certain provisions of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992. The Court held that provisions 10(b) and 10(c) of this Act violated the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Provision 10(b) required operators of leased access television stations to segregate "patently offensive" programming on a separate channel, to block access to that channel from viewers, and to unblock it in response to a viewer's written request.

United States v. Winstar Corp., 518 U.S. 839 (1996), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that the United States Government had breached its contractual obligations. The court in Winstar rejected the Government's "unmistakability defense"—that surrenders of sovereign authority, such as the promise to refrain from regulatory changes, must appear in unmistakable terms in a contract in order to be enforceable.

Held: we would conclude that the State decided as it did because federal law required it to do so. Id., at 1040-1041. 21 Given the explicit and nearly exclusive references to state law that I review above, it seems to me that the Court's decision to take jurisdiction in Labron not only extends Michigan v. Long beyond its original scope, but it stands its rationale on its head.