Volume 540 — United States Reports

This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 540 of the United States Reports:

Held: The Sixth Circuit exceeded the limits imposed on federal habeas review by 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), which permits federal habeas relief only if the State's adjudication on the merits resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law.

Held: The SSA's determination that it can find a claimant not disabled where she remains physically and mentally able to do her previous work, without investigating whether that work exists in significant numbers in the national economy, is a reasonable interpretation of § 423(d)(2)(A) that is entitled to deference under Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U. S. 837.

Held: The officers' 15-to-20-second wait before forcible entry satisfied the Fourth Amendment. Pp. 35-43. (a) The standards bearing on whether officers can legitimately enter after knocking are the same as those for requiring or dispensing with knock and announce altogether.

Held: The Ninth Circuit improperly applied a disparate-impact analysis to respondent's disparate-treatment claim. This Court has consistently distinguished between disparate-treatment and disparate-impact claims. The former arise when an employer treats some people less favorably than others because of a protected characteristic. Liability depends on whether the protected trait actually motivated the employer's action.

Virginia v. Maryland, 540 U.S. 56 (2003), was a 2003 decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that settled a centuries long dispute between the Commonwealth of Virginia and the State of Maryland regarding Virginia's riparian rights to the Potomac River. The Court held in a 7–2 decision that Maryland did not have legal authority to regulate or prohibit Virginia and its citizens from building or improving structures on the river or drawing water from it.

McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, 540 U.S. 93 (2003), is a case in which the United States Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of most of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA), often referred to as the McCain–Feingold Act.

Maryland v. Pringle, 540 U.S. 366 (2003), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court unanimously upheld the arrest of three passengers in an automobile where drugs were found. The case regards the reasonableness of the arrest of a passenger in an automobile.

Held: that the lower courts’ recharacterization powers are limited in the following way: The limitation applies when a court recharacterizes a pro se litigant’s motion as a first § 2255 motion.

Held: An investment scheme promising a fixed rate of return can be an "investment contract" and thus a "security" subject to the federal securities laws.

Verizon Communications v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko, LLP, often shortened to Verizon v. Trinko, 540 U.S. 398 (2004), is a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in the field of Antitrust law. It held that the Telecommunications Act of 1996 had not modified the framework of the Sherman Act, preserving claims that satisfy established antitrust standards without creating new claims that go beyond those standards. It also refused to extend the essential facilities doctrine beyond the facts of the Aspen Skiing Co. v. Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp. case.

Illinois v. Lidster, 540 U.S. 419 (2004), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Fourth Amendment permits the police to use a roadblock to investigate a traffic incident.

Held: Enforcement of the consent decree does not violate the Eleventh Amendment. Pp. 436-442. (a) This case involves the intersection of two areas of federal law: the Eleventh Amendment and the rules governing consent decrees.

Held: Kontrick was not entitled to a discharge of his debts. Kontrick moved for reconsideration. He argued that the Bankruptcy Court lacked jurisdiction over the sole claim on which the court had granted summary judgment, the family-account claim. See id., at 71. The court was powerless to adjudicate the claim, Kontrick insisted, because the amended complaint containing the claim was untimely.

Alaska Dept. of Environmental Conservation v. EPA, 540 U.S. 461 (2004), is a US Supreme Court case clarifying the scope of state environmental regulators and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In a 5–4 decision, the Supreme Court found the EPA has authority to overrule state agency decisions under the Clean Air Act that a company is using the "best available controlling technology" to prevent pollution.

Fellers v. United States, 540 U.S. 519 (2004), is a United States Supreme Court case regarding the Sixth Amendment's right to counsel.

Held: fees may be awarded to attorneys for services rendered only to the extent they are payments to “a professional person employed under section 327,” see, e. g., § 327(a) (authorizing an appointed trustee in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy action to “employ one or more attorneys ... to represent or assist the trustee in carrying out the trustee’s duties under this title”); § 327(e) (authorizing an appointed trustee in a Chapter…

Held: supra, at 548, the substance destroyed here was, at best, "potentially useful" evidence, and therefore Youngblood 's bad-faith requirement applies. The judgment of the Appellate Court of Illinois is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. It is so ordered. JUSTICE STEVENS, concurring in the judgment.

Groh v. Ramirez, 540 U.S. 551 (2004), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that a search warrant that does not state the items to be seized is unreasonable by default, and the officer is not entitled to qualified immunity for executing such a warrant.

Held: The ADEA's text, structure, purpose, history, and relationship to other federal statutes show that the statute does not mean to stop an employer from favoring an older employee over a younger one. Pp. 586-600. 1. The ADEA's prohibition covers "discriminat[ion] . . . because of [an] individual's age" that helps the younger by hurting the older.

Doe v. Chao, 540 U.S. 614 (2004), is a decision by the United States Supreme Court that interpreted the statutory damages provision of the Privacy Act of 1974.

Olympic Airways v. Husain, 540 U.S. 644 (2004), was a United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) case related to Olympic Airways Flight 417. The case arose from the death on January 4, 1998, of Dr. Abid Hanson, a passenger on Olympic Airways Flight 417 from Cairo, Egypt, via Athens, Greece, to New York City in the United States. Hanson died following exposure to secondhand smoke.

Held: rendered the evidence uncovered in the federal habeas proceeding procedurally barred. In any event, the Fifth Circuit ruled, Farr's status as an informant was not "material" for Brady purposes.

Locke v. Davey, 540 U.S. 712 (2004), is a United States Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutionality of a Washington publicly funded scholarship program which excluded students pursuing a "degree in devotional theology". This case examined the "room ... between the two Religion Clauses", the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause.

Held: The Postal Service is not subject to antitrust liability. In both form and function, it is not a separate antitrust person from the United States but is part of the Government, and so is not controlled by the antitrust laws. Pp. 739-748.

Held: The Sixth Circuit's decision was flawed as a matter of fact and as a matter of law. In making the erroneous factual finding that Muhammad had sought to expunge the misconduct charge from his prison record, the court simply overlooked his amended complaint that sought no such relief.

M.K.B. are the initials of Mohamed Kamel Bellahouel, an immigrant Algerian waiter who was interviewed by federal officials. He has reportedly been freed on a $10,000 bond. The only information about the case was inadvertently released and reported by The Christian Science Monitor. In 2004, the United States Supreme Court notably sided with the government's request to grant the case total secrecy.