United States Reports
606 volumes · 104,521 opinions
4,420 opinions in United States Reports with a Wikipedia-sourced synopsis — the cases notable enough that someone wrote an encyclopedia article about them.
- National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie (1977)432 U.S. 43
National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie, 432 U.S. 43 (1977), arising out of what is sometimes referred to as the Skokie Affair, is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States dealing with freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. This case is commonly reviewed in constitutional law classes. Related court decisions are captioned Skokie v. NSPA, Collin v. Smith and Smith v. Collin. The Supreme Court ruled 5–4, per curiam, granting certiorari and reversing and remanding the Illinois Supreme Court's denial to lift the lower court's injunction on the NSPA's march. The ruling dictated that when citizens assert that their speech is being restrained, the matter must be reviewed immediately by the judiciary.
- Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison (1977)432 U.S. 63
Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison, 432 U.S. 63 (1977), is a landmark decision on religious liberty and employment law. In 1977, the US Supreme Court held that an employer may discharge an employee who observes a seventh-day sabbath, and that such employee is not entitled to equal employment opportunity protection under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which makes it an unlawful employment practice for an employer to discriminate against an employee on the basis of his religion. This ruling has been significantly tailored by Groff v.
- Manson v. Brathwaite (1977)432 U.S. 98
Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98 (1977) was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1977. The decision touched on the exclusionary rule in state criminal proceedings.
- Patterson v. New York (1977)432 U.S. 197
Patterson v. New York, 432 U.S. 197 (1977), was a legal case heard by the Supreme Court of the United States that stated that the Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment did not prevent the burdening of a defendant to prove the affirmative defense of extreme emotional disturbance as defined by law in the state of New York.
- Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Commission (1977)Held state or territorial law unconstitutional432 U.S. 333
Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Commission, 432 U.S. 333 (1977), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously struck down a North Carolina law prohibiting the sale of apples in closed containers marked with any apple grade other than the United States Department of Agriculture grade.[1] However, displaying the USDA grade was not required. Washington state, a major apple producer, used apple standards superior to those used by the USDA. The Court found that North Carolina's law violated the Commerce Clause because they discriminated against Washington state apple producers while working to the advantage of local North Carolina apple growers. John R. Jordan, Jr., argued the cause for Hunt. With him on the brief were Rufus L.
- Beal v. Doe (1977)432 U.S. 438
Beal v. Doe, 432 U.S. 438 (1977), was a United States Supreme Court case that concerned the disbursement of federal funds in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania statute restricted federal funding to abortion clinics. The Supreme Court ruled states are not required to treat abortion in the same manner as potential motherhood. The opinion of the Court left the central holding of the Roe v. Wade decision – abortion as a right – intact. The statute was upheld, with Justice Powell writing the majority opinion.
- Maher v. Roe (1977)432 U.S. 464
Maher v. Roe, 432 U.S. 464 (1977), is a U.S. Supreme Court decision that addressed a Connecticut regulation denying Medicaid funding for nontherapeutic (elective) abortions while permitting funding for childbirth. The court held that, although the Constitution protects a woman’s right to choose an abortion, it does not require the government to subsidize the exercise of that right. The decision established a critical distinction between state interference with a constitutional right and a state's decision not to fund that right, shaping the non-entitlement funding doctrine in constitutional law.
- United States Trust Company of New York v. New Jersey (1977)Held state or territorial law unconstitutional431 U.S. 1
United States Trust Co. of New York v. New Jersey, 431 U.S. 1 (1977), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the retroactive repeal of a statutory covenant that protected Port Authority bondholders violates the Contract Clause. An impairment of a state's own financial obligations is unconstitutional if it is not both reasonable and necessary to serve an important public purpose. The case was a major reiteration of the Contract Clause's importance after a long period in which it was largely ignored by the court.
- Linmark Associates, Inc. v. Township of Willingboro (1977)Held municipal or local ordinance unconstitutional431 U.S. 85
Linmark Associates, Inc. v. Township of Willingboro, 431 U.S. 85 (1977), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States found that an ordinance prohibiting the posting of "for sale" and "sold" signs on real estate within the town violated the First Amendment to the United States Constitution protections for commercial speech.
- Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977)Overruled (2018)431 U.S. 209
Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, 431 U.S. 209 (1977), was a US labor law case where the United States Supreme Court upheld the maintaining of a union shop in a public workplace. Public school teachers in Detroit had sought to overturn the requirement that they pay fees equivalent to union dues on the grounds that they opposed public sector collective bargaining and objected to the political activities of the union. In a unanimous decision, the Court affirmed that the union shop, legal in the private sector, is also legal in the public sector.
Overruled by Janus v. State, County, and Municipal Employees (2018) - Moore v. City of East Cleveland (1977)Held municipal or local ordinance unconstitutional431 U.S. 494
Moore v. City of East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494 (1977), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that an East Cleveland, Ohio zoning ordinance that prohibited Inez Moore, a black grandmother, from living with her grandchild was unconstitutional. Writing for a plurality of the Court, Associate Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr.
- United States v. Ramsey (1977)431 U.S. 606
United States v. Ramsey, 431 U.S. 606 (1977), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held the search of letters or envelopes from foreign countries falls under the border exception to the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.
- Carey v. Population Services International (1977)Held state or territorial law unconstitutional431 U.S. 678
Carey v. Population Services International, 431 U.S. 678 (1977), is a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court held that it was unconstitutional to prohibit anyone other than a licensed pharmacist to distribute nonprescription contraceptives to persons 16 years of age or over, to prohibit the distribution of nonprescription contraceptives by any adult to minors under 16 years of age, and to prohibit anyone, including licensed pharmacists, to advertise or display contraceptives. The Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does not allow a state to intrude on an individual's decisions on matters of procreation which is protected as privacy rights.
- Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois (1977)431 U.S. 720
Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, 431 U.S. 720 (1977) is a United States Supreme Court case that involved issues concerning statutory standing in antitrust law.
- Piper v. Chris-Craft Industries, Inc. (1977)430 U.S. 1
This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 430 of the United States Reports:
- Delaware Tribal Business Committee v. Weeks (1977)430 U.S. 73
Delaware Tribal Business Committee v. Weeks, 430 U.S. 73 (1977), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court.
- Marks v. United States (1977)430 U.S. 188
Marks v. United States, 430 U.S. 188 (1977), is a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that explained how the holding of a case should be viewed where there is no majority supporting the rationale of any opinion.
- Califano v. Goldfarb (1977)Held federal statute unconstitutional430 U.S. 199
Califano v. Goldfarb, 430 U.S. 199 (1977), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that the different treatment of men and women mandated by 42 U.S.C. § 402(f)(1)(D) constituted invidious discrimination against female wage earners by affording them less protection for their surviving spouses than is provided to male employees, and therefore violated the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The case was brought by a widower who was denied survivor benefits on the grounds that he had not been receiving at least one-half support from his wife when she died.
- Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Brady (1977)Altered precedent430 U.S. 274
Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Brady, 430 U.S. 274 (1977), is a United States Supreme Court case regarding the Commerce Clause and sales tax.
Overruled Spector Motor Service v. O'Connor (1951) - Califano v. Webster (1977)430 U.S. 313
Califano v. Webster, 430 U.S. 313 (1977), was a case before the United States Supreme Court that was decided per curiam.
- Swain v. Pressley (1977)430 U.S. 372
Swain v. Pressley, 430 U.S. 372 (1977), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that Congress's abrogation of standard habeas corpus procedure in the District of Columbia's local court system was not an unconstitutional suspension of the writ because the District had an adequate post-conviction alternative.
- Brewer v. Williams (1977)430 U.S. 387
Brewer v. Williams, 430 U.S. 387 (1977), is a decision by the United States Supreme Court that clarifies what constitutes "waiver" of the right to counsel for the purposes of the Sixth Amendment. Under Miranda v. Arizona, evidence obtained by police during custodial interrogation of a suspect who was not informed of his Miranda rights is inadmissible. Here, however, the defendant was indicted in court and had asserted his desire to have counsel; thus, his Sixth Amendment right to counsel had attached. At issue was whether a voluntary admission of incriminating facts in response to police statements made while the defendant was in custody and outside the presence of his lawyer constituted a waiver of this right to counsel.
- Atlas Roofing Company Inc v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission Irey (1977)430 U.S. 442
Atlas Roofing Company, Inc. v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, 430 U.S. 442 (1977), was a United States Supreme Court decision in administrative law. The decision held that the Seventh Amendment to the US Constitution did not require a jury trial to enforce the civil penalties for violating a federal "public rights" statute, allowing enforcement by an administrative agency.
- United States v. Antelope (1977)430 U.S. 641
United States v. Antelope, 430 U.S. 641 (1977), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that American Indians convicted on reservation land were not deprived of the equal protection of the laws; (a) the federal criminal statutes are not based on impermissible racial classifications but on political membership in an Indian tribe or nation; and (b) the challenged statutes do not violate equal protection. Indians or non-Indians can be charged with first-degree murder committed in a federal enclave.
- Ingraham v. Wright (1977)430 U.S. 651
Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651 (1977), was a United States Supreme Court case that upheld the disciplinary corporal punishment policy of Florida's public schools by a 5-4 vote. The Court also held that the Eighth Amendment did not apply to corporal punishment, and that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment did require notice or a hearing prior to the imposition of such punishment.
- Wooley v. Maynard (1977)Held state or territorial law unconstitutional430 U.S. 705
Wooley v. Maynard, 430 U.S. 705 (1977), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that New Hampshire could not constitutionally require citizens to display the state motto upon their license plates when the state motto was offensive to their moral convictions.
- Fiallo Ex Rel. Rodriguez v. Bell (1977)430 U.S. 787
Fiallo v. Bell, 430 U.S. 787 (1977), was a U.S. Supreme Court case that challenged the constitutionality of Sections 101(b)(1)(D) and 101(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. The Sections gave immigration preference to children or parents of either existing U.S. citizens or of noncitizens residing under lawful permanent resident status. But, as the Court wrote, the statute defined “child” narrowly: “an unmarried person under 21 years of age who is a legitimate or legitimated child, a stepchild, an adopted child, or an illegitimate child seeking preference by virtue of his relationship with his mother”.
- Bounds v. Smith (1977)430 U.S. 817
Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817 (1977), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court tested the basic constitutional right of prison inmates' access to legal documents prior to court. Prison authorities would consequently be required to provide legal assistance or counsel to inmates, whether it be through a trained legal professional or access to a legal library. Multiple prisoners alleged that they were denied access to the courts due to lack of an adequate legal library and assistance with court related documents.
- Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. (1977)429 U.S. 252
Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp, 429 U.S. 252 (1977), was a case heard by the Supreme Court of the United States dealing with a zoning ordinance that in a practical way barred families of various socio-economic, and ethno-racial backgrounds from residing in a neighborhood. The Court held that the ordinance was constitutional because there was no proof that "discriminatory purpose was a motivating factor in the Village's decision."
- Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle (1977)429 U.S. 274
Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274 (1977), often shortened to Mt. Healthy v. Doyle, was a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court decision arising from a fired teacher's lawsuit against his former employer, the Mount Healthy City Schools. The Court considered three issues: whether federal-question jurisdiction existed in the case, whether the Eleventh Amendment barred federal lawsuits against school districts, and whether the First and Fourteenth Amendments prevented the district, as a government agency, from firing or otherwise disciplining an employee for constitutionally protected speech on a matter of public concern where the same action might have taken place for other, unprotected activities. Justice William Rehnquist wrote the opinion.
- Whalen v. Roe (1977)429 U.S. 589
Whalen v. Roe, 429 U.S. 589 (1977), was a case brought before the Supreme Court of the United States. The case involved a New York state prescription monitoring law requiring reporting and storing of information concerning all Schedule II drug prescriptions. Physicians were required to report the name of the prescribing physician; the dispensing pharmacy; the drug and dosage; and the patient's name, address, and age. This information was then stored by the New York Department of State. A group of patients, several doctors who prescribe such drugs, and two associations of physicians brought suit against the New York State Department of Health commissioner, seeking to enjoin the State from enforcing the Act.
- United States v. Morrison (1976)429 U.S. 1
This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 429 of the United States Reports:
- Estelle v. Gamble (1976)429 U.S. 97
Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States established the standard of what a prisoner must plead in order to claim a violation of Eighth Amendment rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Specifically, the Court held that a prisoner must allege acts or omissions sufficiently harmful to evidence deliberate indifference to serious medical needs. Though the Court credited Gamble's complaint that doctors had failed to provide appropriate care, it held that medical malpractice did not rise to the level of "cruel and unusual punishment" simply because the victim is a prisoner.
- General Electric Co. v. Gilbert (1976)429 U.S. 125
General Electric Co. v. Gilbert, 429 U.S. 125 (1976), is a 1976 United States Supreme Court case authored by Chief Justice William Rehnquist concerning gender-based discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In a 6–3 decision, the Court held that pregnancy could reasonably be excluded from an employer's disability benefits plan. The Court's majority opinion applied its conclusion in Geduldig v. Aiello (1974), which held that exclusion of pregnancy from a disability plan did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
- Craig v. Boren (1976)Held state or territorial law unconstitutional429 U.S. 190
Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190 (1976), is a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that statutory or administrative sex classifications were subject to intermediate scrutiny under the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The case was argued by future Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg while she was working for the American Civil Liberties Union, who later wrote for the majority in United States v. Virginia.
Overruled Goesaert v. Cleary (1948) - Usery v. Turner Elkhorn Mining Co. (1976)428 U.S. 1
This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 428 of the United States Reports:
- Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth (1976)Held state or territorial law unconstitutional428 U.S. 52
Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth, 428 U.S. 52 (1976), is a United States Supreme Court case on abortion. The plaintiffs challenged the constitutionality of a Missouri statute regulating abortion. The Court upheld the right to have an abortion, declaring unconstitutional the statute's requirement of prior written consent from a parent (in the case of a minor) or a spouse (in the case of a married woman).
- Bellotti v. Baird (1976)428 U.S. 132
Bellotti v. Baird, 428 U.S. 132 (1976), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld a Massachusetts law requiring parental consent to a minor's abortion, under the provision that "if one or both of the [minor]'s parents refuse... consent, consent may be obtained by order of a judge... for good cause shown." The decision was unanimous, and the opinion of the Court was written by Harry Blackmun. The law in question "permits a minor capable of giving informed consent to obtain a court order allowing abortion without parental consultation, and further permits even a minor incapable of giving informed consent to obtain an abortion order without parental consultation where it is shown that abortion would be in her best interests." The case was initially titled as Baird v.
- Gregg v. Georgia (1976)Altered precedent428 U.S. 153
Gregg v. Georgia, Proffitt v. Florida, Jurek v. Texas, Woodson v. North Carolina, and Roberts v. Louisiana, 428 U.S. 153 (1976), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court. It reaffirmed the Court's acceptance of the use of the death penalty in the United States, upholding, in particular, the death sentence imposed on Troy Leon Gregg. The set of cases is referred to by a leading scholar as the July 2 Cases, and elsewhere referred to by the lead case Gregg. The court set forth the two main features that capital sentencing procedures must employ in order to comply with the Eighth Amendment ban on "cruel and unusual punishments". The decision essentially ended the de facto moratorium on the death penalty imposed by the Court in its 1972 decision in Furman v. Georgia (1972).
- South Dakota v. Opperman (1976)428 U.S. 364
South Dakota v. Opperman, 428 U.S. 364 (1976), elaborated on the community caretaking doctrine. Under the Fourth Amendment, "unreasonable" searches and seizures are forbidden. In addition to their law-enforcement duties, the police must engage in what the court has termed a community caretaking role, including such duties as removing obstructions from roadways to ensure the free flow of traffic. When the police act in this role, they may inventory cars they have seized without "unreasonably" searching those cars.
- Buffalo Forge Co. v. United Steelworkers (1976)428 U.S. 397
Buffalo Forge Co. v. Steelworkers, 428 U.S. 397 (1976), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that, under the Norris–LaGuardia Act, courts may not order injunctive relief pending arbitration to stop sympathy strikes, but courts may uphold an arbitrator's determination that a sympathy strike violated a collective bargaining agreement.
- United States v. Janis (1976)428 U.S. 433
United States v. Janis, 428 U.S. 433 (1976), was a Supreme Court Case that found Max Janis and Morris Levine guilty of illegal bookmaking activities in Los Angeles in a 5-3 ruling. The two were arrested for the crime in November 1968. Appealing on the grounds of unconstitutionally seized evidence, Janis and Levine were heard by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in 1973. The case was ultimately heard by the Supreme Court in 1975, and the two were found guilty in 1976. More importantly, the case established that the exclusionary rule does not apply to civil cases where evidence is unconstitutionally seized by a state officer but used by a federal institution.
- Stone v. Powell (1976)428 U.S. 465
Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465 (1976), was decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that limited which claims of Fourth Amendment violations could be made by state prisoners in habeas corpus petitions in federal courts. Specifically, a claim that the exclusionary rule had been broken would be barred if state courts had already given it a full and fair hearing. The decision combined two cases that were argued before the Supreme Court on the same day with similar issues, one filed by Lloyd Powell (convicted of murder in California) and the other, titled Wolff v. Rice, filed by David Rice (convicted of murder in Nebraska).
- United States v. Martinez-Fuerte (1976)428 U.S. 543
United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543 (1976), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court that allowed the United States Border Patrol to set up permanent or fixed checkpoints on public highways leading to or away from the Mexican border and that the checkpoints are not a violation of the Fourth Amendment.
- Aldinger v. Howard (1976)427 U.S. 1
This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 427 of the United States Reports:
- Young v. American Mini Theatres, Inc. (1976)427 U.S. 50
Young v. American Mini Theatres, 427 U.S. 50 (1976), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States upheld a city ordinance of Detroit, Michigan requiring dispersal of adult businesses throughout the city.
- United States v. Agurs (1976)427 U.S. 97
United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 (1976), was a case heard by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1976. The case clarified the obligation of a prosecutor to provide exculpatory evidence to a criminal defendant.
- Lodge 76, International Ass'n of MacHinists & Aerospace Workers v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission (1976)Altered precedent427 U.S. 132
Machinists v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission, 427 U.S. 132 (1976), is a United States labor law case, concerning the scope of federal preemption against state law for labor rights.
Overruled United Auto Workers v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Board (1949) - Runyon v. McCrary (1976)427 U.S. 160
Runyon v. McCrary, 427 U.S. 160 (1976), is a landmark case by the United States Supreme Court, which ruled that private schools that discriminate on the basis of race or establish racial segregation are in violation of federal law. Whereas Brown v. Board of Education barred segregation by public schools, this case barred segregation in private schools. This decision is built on Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co. another landmark civil rights case that affirmed the federal government's ability to penalize racist acts by private actors. Dissenting Justices Byron White and William Rehnquist argued that the legislative history of 42 U.S.C.
- Meachum v. Fano (1976)427 U.S. 215
Meachum v. Fano, 427 U.S. 215 (1976), is a 1976 United States Supreme Court case concerning the due process rights of prisoners. In this case, the Court held 6–3 that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment did not grant a prisoner a right to a fact-finding hearing when he was transferred to a new facility, even if it had significantly more unfavorable conditions compared to his previous facility. Justice Byron White wrote the majority opinion, and John Paul Stevens wrote the dissenting opinion.