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.
- Police Department of Chicago v. Mosley (1972)Held municipal or local ordinance unconstitutional408 U.S. 92
Police Department of Chicago v. Mosley, 408 U.S. 92 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court case which concerned freedom of speech under the First Amendment. Oral argument for this case was consolidated with Grayned v. City of Rockford, but separate opinions were issued for each. Earl Mosley had protested employment discrimination by carrying a sign on the sidewalk in front of a Chicago high school, until the city of Chicago made it illegal to do so. Although Chicago believed that its ordinance was a time, place, or manner restriction, and therefore was a constitutional law, the Supreme Court ruled that it was a content-based restriction, because it treated labor-related protests differently from other protests.
- Healy v. James (1972)408 U.S. 169
Healy v. James, 408 U.S. 169 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that Central Connecticut State College's refusal to recognize a campus chapter of Students for a Democratic Society was unconstitutional. The denial of official recognition was found to violate the First Amendment.
- Kois v. Wisconsin (1972)408 U.S. 229
Kois v. Wisconsin, 408 U.S. 229 (1972), was a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of the obscenity conviction of Milwaukee editor-publisher John Kois, whose underground newspaper Kaleidoscope had published two small photographs of pictures of nudes and a sexually oriented poem entitled "Sex Poem" in 1968. The Supreme Court ruled that, in the context in which they appeared, the photographs were rationally related to a news article which they illustrated and were thus entitled to Fourteenth Amendment protection, and that the poem "bears some of the earmarks of an attempt at serious art" (whether successful or not), and thus was not obscene under the Roth v. United States test ("whether or not the 'dominant' theme of the material appeals to prurient interest").
- Furman v. Georgia (1972)Held state or territorial law unconstitutional408 U.S. 238
Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972), was a landmark criminal case in which the United States Supreme Court decided that arbitrary and inconsistent imposition of the death penalty violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, and constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. It was a per curiam decision. Five justices each wrote separately in support of the decision. Although the justices did not rule that the death penalty was unconstitutional, the Furman decision invalidated the death sentences of nearly 700 people. The decision mandated a degree of consistency in the application of the death penalty. This case resulted in a de facto moratorium of capital punishment throughout the United States.
- Morrissey v. Brewer (1972)408 U.S. 471
Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that people facing parole revocation have due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision requires that the states provide for a hearing before a "neutral and detached" hearing body, such as a parole board, to determine the factual basis for parole violations. This hearing is colloquially known as a "Morrissey hearing."
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth (1972)408 U.S. 564
Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564 (1972), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court concerning alleged discrimination against a nontenured teacher at Wisconsin State University-Oshkosh.
- Perry v. Sindermann (1972)408 U.S. 593
Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U.S. 593 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court decision affecting educational case law involving tenure and due process.
- Gravel v. United States (1972)408 U.S. 606
Gravel v. United States, 408 U.S. 606 (1972), was a case regarding the protections offered by the Speech or Debate Clause of the United States Constitution. In the case, the Supreme Court of the United States held that the privileges and immunities of the Constitution's Speech or Debate Clause enjoyed by members of Congress also extend to Congressional aides, but not to activity outside the legislative process.
- Branzburg v. Hayes (1972)408 U.S. 665
Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665 (1972), is a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court invalidating the use of the First Amendment as a defense for reporters summoned to testify before a grand jury. The case was argued February 23, 1972, and decided June 29 of the same year. The reporters lost their case by a vote of 5–4. This case is cited for the rule that in federal courts, a reporter may not generally avoid testifying in a criminal grand jury, and is one of a limited number of cases in which the U.S. Supreme Court has considered the use of reporters' privilege.
- Kleindienst v. Mandel (1972)408 U.S. 753
Kleindienst v. Mandel, 408 U.S. 753 (1972), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that the United States Attorney General has the right to refuse somebody's entry to the United States, as he has been empowered to do so in § 212(a)(28) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952.
- M/s Bremen v. Zapata off-Shore Company (1972)407 U.S. 1
The Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Company, 407 U.S. 1 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court considered when a U.S. court should uphold the validity of a contractual forum selection clause.
- Argersinger v. Hamlin (1972)407 U.S. 25
Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25 (1972), is a United States Supreme Court decision holding that the accused cannot be subjected to actual imprisonment unless provided with counsel. Gideon v. Wainwright made the right to counsel provided in the Sixth Amendment applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
- Fuentes v. Shevin (1972)Held state or territorial law unconstitutional407 U.S. 67
Fuentes v. Shevin, 407 U.S. 67 (1972), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States wherein petitioners challenged the constitutionality of the Uniform Commercial Code provisions of two states, Florida and Pennsylvania, which allowed for the summary seizure of a person's goods or chattels under a writ of replevin. The statutes were challenged under the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court held that the statutes acted as deprivations of plaintiff's property without due process. The Court noted that seizure without notice and the opportunity for a hearing is acceptable only under limited circumstances: The seizure is necessary for an important public or government interest, There is a need for prompt action, and The seizure is initiated by an agent of the government.
- Adams v. Williams (1972)407 U.S. 143
Adams v. United States, 407 U.S. 143 (1972), is a United States Supreme Court in which the Court held that tips from a known informant can create enough reasonable suspicion to justify a patdown under Terry v. Ohio.
- Pennsylvania v. New York (1972)6–3407 U.S. 206
Pennsylvania v. New York was a case that was heard in 1972 before the U.S. Supreme Court. The initial filing was allowed at 407 U.S. 206 and the final decision was ordered at 407 U.S. 223 (1972).
- Flood v. Kuhn (1972)407 U.S. 258
Flood v. Kuhn, 407 U.S. 258 (1972), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that preserved the reserve clause in Major League Baseball (MLB) players' contracts. By a 5–3 margin, the Court reaffirmed the antitrust exemption that had been granted to professional baseball in 1922 under Federal Baseball Club v. National League, and previously affirmed by Toolson v. New York Yankees, Inc. in 1953. While the majority believed that baseball's antitrust exemption was anomalous compared to other professional sports, it held that any changes to the exemption should be made through Congress and not the courts. The National League had instituted the reserve clause in 1879 as a means of limiting salaries by keeping players under team control.
- United States v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (1972)407 U.S. 297
United States v. U.S. District Court, 407 U.S. 297 (1972), also known as the Keith Case, is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that upheld, in a unanimous 8-0 ruling, the requirements of the Fourth Amendment in cases of domestic surveillance targeting a domestic threat.
- Barker v. Wingo (1972)407 U.S. 514
Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, specifically the right of defendants in criminal cases to a speedy trial. The Court held that determinations of whether or not the right to a speedy trial has been violated must be made on a case-by-case basis, and set forth four factors to be considered in the determination.
- Lloyd Corp. v. Tanner (1972)407 U.S. 551
Lloyd Corp. v. Tanner, 407 U.S. 551 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court ruling that the passing out of anti-war leaflets at the Lloyd Center in Portland, Oregon, was an infringement on property rights. This differed from Marsh v. Alabama (1946) and Amalgamated Food Employees Union v. Logan Valley Plaza (1968) in that Marsh had the attributes of a municipality and Logan Valley related to picketing a particular store, while the current case, the distribution of leaflets, is unrelated to any activity in the property.
- S&E Contractors, Inc. v. United States (1972)406 U.S. 1
This is a list of all United States Supreme Court cases from volume 406 of the United States Reports:
- Vermont v. New York (1972)9–0406 U.S. 186
Vermont v. New York, 406 U.S. 186 (1972), was a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court giving the State of Vermont permission to file an original complaint against the State of New York and International Paper Corporation.
- Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)Held state or territorial law unconstitutional406 U.S. 205
Wisconsin v. Jonas Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, in which the Court held that Amish children could not be placed under compulsory education past 8th grade. The Court ruled that the Amish parents' fundamental right to free exercise of religion outweighed the state's interest in educating their children. The case is often cited as a basis for parents' right to educate their children outside of traditional private or public schools. Like Sherbert v. Verner, the Court in Yoder required the government accommodate religious exercise by applying strict scrutiny to a neutral law that burdened religious exercise. Yoder differs from Sherbert v.
- Johnson v. Louisiana (1972)406 U.S. 356
Johnson v. Louisiana, 406 U. S. 356 (1972), was a court case in the U.S. Supreme Court involving the Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Louisiana law that allowed less-than unanimous jury verdicts (9 to 12 jurors) to convict persons charged with a felony, does not violate the Due Process clause. This case was argued on a similar basis as Apodaca v. Oregon.
- Apodaca v. Oregon (1972)Overruled (2020)406 U.S. 404
Apodaca v. Oregon, 406 U.S. 404 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that state juries may convict a defendant by a less-than-unanimous verdict in a felony criminal case. The four-justice plurality opinion of the court, written by Justice White, affirmed the judgment of the Oregon Court of Appeals and held that there was no constitutional right to a unanimous verdict. Although federal law requires federal juries to reach criminal verdicts unanimously, the Court held Oregon's practice did not violate the Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury and so allowed it to continue. In Johnson v.
Overruled by Ramos v. Louisiana (2020) - Kastigar v. United States (1972)406 U.S. 441
Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court decision that ruled on the issue of whether the government's grant of immunity from prosecution can compel a witness to testify over an assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. In a 5-2 decision (Justices Brennan and Rehnquist took no part in the consideration of the case), the Court held that the government can overcome a claim of Fifth Amendment privilege by granting a witness "use and derivative use" immunity in exchange for his testimony.
- Brooks v. Tennessee (1972)Held state or territorial law unconstitutional406 U.S. 605
Brooks v. Tennessee, 406 U.S. 605 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that a criminal defendant cannot be forced by law to testify before all other witnesses.
- Kirby v. Illinois (1972)406 U.S. 682
Kirby v. Illinois, 406 U.S. 682 (1972), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel did not attach during a pre-indictment identification.
- Jackson v. Indiana (1972)Held state or territorial law unconstitutional406 U.S. 715
Jackson v. Indiana, 406 U.S. 715 (1972), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that determined a U.S. state violated due process by involuntarily committing a criminal defendant for an indefinite period of time solely on the basis of his permanent incompetency to stand trial on the charges filed against him.
- Aikens v. California (1972)406 U.S. 813
Aikens v. California, 406 U.S. 813 (1972), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court where a petitioner (in the U.S. Supreme Court, the plaintiff (Aikens) is called the petitioner and the defendant (the State of California) is called the respondent) was appealing his conviction and death sentence. After oral argument had been made on the case, but before the court decided on it, the Supreme Court of California in People v. Anderson, declared the death penalty unconstitutional under the state constitution. This made his appeal unnecessary because the decision in Anderson declared capital punishment in California unconstitutional under Art. 1, 6, of the state constitution...
- Boyd v. Dutton (1972)405 U.S. 1
This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 405 of the United States Reports:
- Parisi v. Davidson (1972)405 U.S. 34
Parisi v. Davidson, 405 U.S. 34 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court case resulting in the grant of habeas corpus relief to a soldier, Joseph Parisi, seeking an honorable discharge as a conscientious objector. The case was argued on October 19 and 20, 1971, and decided on February 23, 1972. The respondent was then Major General Phillip B. Davidson.
- Giglio v. United States (1972)405 U.S. 150
Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the prosecution's failure to inform the jury that a witness had been promised not to be prosecuted in exchange for his testimony was a failure to fulfill the duty to present all material evidence to the jury, and constituted a violation of due process, requiring a new trial. This is the case even if the failure to disclose was a matter of negligence and not intent. The case extended the Court's holding in Brady v. Maryland, requiring such agreements to be disclosed to defense counsel. As a result of this case, the term Giglio material is sometimes used to refer to any information pertaining to deals that witnesses in a criminal case may have entered into with the government.
- Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville (1972)Held municipal or local ordinance unconstitutional405 U.S. 156
Papachristou v. Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court case resulting in a Jacksonville vagrancy ordinance being declared unconstitutionally vague. The case was argued on December 8, 1971, and decided on February 24, 1972. The respondent was the city of Jacksonville, Florida.
- Federal Trade Commission v. Sperry & Hutchinson Co. (1972)405 U.S. 233
Federal Trade Commission v. Sperry & Hutchinson Trading Stamp Co., 405 U.S. 233 (1972), is a decision of the United States Supreme Court holding that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) may act against a company's “unfair” business practices even though the practice is none of the following: an antitrust violation, an incipient antitrust violation, a violation of the “spirit” of the antitrust laws, or a deceptive practice. This legal theory is termed the "unfairness doctrine."
- Hawaii v. Standard Oil Co. of Cal. (1972)405 U.S. 251
Hawaii v. Standard Oil Co. of Cal., 405 U.S. 251 (1972), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that Section 4 of the Clayton Antitrust Act does not authorize a U.S. state to sue for damages for an injury to its general economy allegedly attributable to a violation of the United States antitrust law.
- Adams v. Illinois (1972)405 U.S. 278
Adams v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 278 (1972) was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the right to counsel in preliminary hearings announced by Coleman v. Alabama does not have a retroactive application. The retroactivity of criminal procedure decisions was controversial among members of Court at the time, but the Court announced a more concrete rule in Teague v. Lane.
- Rabe v. Washington (1972)405 U.S. 313
Rabe v. Washington, 405 U.S. 313 (1972), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court involving the application of obscenity laws and criminal procedure to the states. On 29 August 1968, William Rabe, the manager of a drive-in movie theater in Richland, Washington, was arrested on obscenity charges for showing the film Carmen, Baby. Due to First Amendment concerns, the local court convicted Rabe not on the basis that the film as a whole was obscene, but that exhibiting it in a drive-in theater was. The Supreme Court reversed the conviction holding that the citizens of Washington had no notice under the Sixth Amendment that the place where a film was shown was an element of the offense.
- Cruz v. Beto (1972)405 U.S. 319
Cruz v. Beto, 405 U.S. 319 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court upheld a Free Exercise claim based on the allegations that the state of Texas had discriminated against a Buddhist prisoner by "denying him a reasonable opportunity to pursue his Buddhist faith comparable to that offered other prisoners adhering to conventional religious precepts."
- Commissioner v. First Security Bank of Utah, N. A. (1972)405 U.S. 394
Commissioner v. First Security Bank of Utah, N.A., 405 U.S. 394 (1972), was a Supreme Court case holding that a bank prohibited from doing insurance business did not need to include in gross income the insurance commissions on credit life insurance that the bank referred to an unrelated insurance company. The case syllabus says that "no share of premium received by life insurance company on business referred to it by commonly controlled national banks could be attributed to banks, and holding company did not utilize its control over banks and insurance company to distort their true net incomes, although banks encouraged lenders to take out insurance and referred them to insurance company, where federal banking laws would have prohibited banks from receiving share in premiums."
- Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972)Held state or territorial law unconstitutional405 U.S. 438
Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438 (1972), is a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that established the right of unmarried people to possess contraception on the same basis as married couples.
- Stanley v. Illinois (1972)Held state or territorial law unconstitutional405 U.S. 645
Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645 (1972), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the fathers of children born out of wedlock had a fundamental right to their children. The US Supreme Court found that, as a matter of due process, unwed fathers ought to be guaranteed the same rights as married or divorced fathers, who have a right to a hearing. The Court also held that Illinois' denial of unwed fathers a hearing, while extending that right to all other parents, violated the equal protection of the laws. Until the ruling, when the mother of a child born out of wedlock was unable to care for the child, through death or other circumstances, the child was made a ward of the state and either placed in an orphanage or foster care or for adoption.
- Sierra Club v. Morton (1972)405 U.S. 727
Sierra Club v. Morton, 405 U.S. 727 (1972), is a Supreme Court of the United States case on the issue of standing under the Administrative Procedure Act. The Court rejected a lawsuit by the Sierra Club seeking to block the development of a ski resort at Mineral King valley in the Sierra Nevada Mountains because the club had not alleged any injury.
- California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited (1972)404 U.S. 508
California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited, 404 U.S. 508 (1972), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court involving the right to make petitions to the government. The right to petition is enshrined in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as: "Congress shall make no law...abridging...the right of the people...to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." This case involved the claim that one group of companies was using state and federal regulatory actions to eliminate competitors. The Supreme Court ruled that the right to petition is integral to the legal system but using lawful means to achieve unlawful restraint of trade is not protected in some instances.
- Trbovich v. United Mine Workers (1972)404 U.S. 528
Trbovich v. United Mine Workers, 404 U.S. 528 (1972), is a 6–1 decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 gave union members the right to intervene in enforcement proceedings brought by the United States Department of Labor in enforcement proceedings under the Act.
- Hicks v. Pleasure House, Inc. (1971)404 U.S. 1
This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 404 of the United States Reports:
- Younger v. Gilmore (1971)404 U.S. 15
Younger v. Gilmore, 404 U.S. 15 (1971), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that imprisoned people have a right to access a law library.
- Reed v. Reed (1971)Held state or territorial law unconstitutional404 U.S. 71
Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S. 71 (1971), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States holding that the administrators of estates cannot be named in a way that discriminates between sexes. In Reed v. Reed the Supreme Court ruled for the first time that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibited differential treatment based on sex.
- Santobello v. New York (1971)404 U.S. 257
Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257 (1971), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that the sentence of the defendant should be vacated because the plea agreement specified that the prosecutor would not recommend a sentence, but the prosecutor breached the agreement by recommending the maximum sentence.
- Heidel v. Arizona State Department of Public Welfare (1971)404 U.S. 997
Coit v. Green, 404 U.S. 997 (1971), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court affirmed a decision that a private school which practiced racial discrimination could not be eligible for a tax exemption.
- Guey Heung Lee v. David Johnson (1971)404 U.S. 1215
Guey Heung Lee v. Johnson, 404 U.S. 1215 (1971), was a United States Supreme Court case regarding the desegregation of schools in San Francisco.