United States Reports

United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp., 299 U.S. 304 (1936), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States concerning foreign affairs, in which the Supreme Court held that the President has primacy with respect to, and that federal government has broad authority over, foreign affairs.

Wallace v. Cutten, 298 U.S. 229 (1936), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the authority of the United States Secretary of Agriculture under the Grain Futures Act was limited to prevent continued violation of the act, not past violations.

Carter v. Carter Coal Company, 298 U.S. 238 (1936), is a United States Supreme Court decision interpreting the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, which permits the United States Congress to "regulate Commerce... among the several States." Specifically, it analyzes the extent of Congress' power, according to the Commerce Clause, looking at whether or not they have the right to regulate manufacturing.

Ashton v. Cameron County Water Improvement District No. 1, 298 U.S. 513 (1936), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that an insolvent state agency cannot declare bankruptcy. More particularly, Congress's powers under the Bankruptcy Clause cannot extend to state agencies in violation of federalism principles, and bankruptcy courts cannot establish jurisdiction over the state agencies where those principles have been violated. The modern municipal bankruptcy statute, Chapter 9 of the Bankruptcy Code, is constitutional.

Morehead v. New York ex rel. Tipaldo, 298 U.S. 587 (1936), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that New York State's minimum wage law for women violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by infringing upon the freedom of contract between employers and adult female employees. The Court reaffirmed its prior holding in Adkins v. Children's Hospital, which was overturned the very next year in West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish in what has since become known as the switch in time that saved nine.

United States v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1 (1936), is a U.S. Supreme Court case that held that the U.S. Congress has not only the power to lay taxes to the level necessary to carry out its other powers enumerated in Article I of the U.S. Constitution but also a broad authority to tax and spend for the "general welfare" of the United States. The decision itself concerned whether the processing taxes instituted by the 1933 Agricultural Adjustment Act were constitutional.

Gooch v. United States, 297 U.S. 124 (1936), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that holding a police officer hostage while crossing state lines is within the scope of federal ransom and kidnapping statutes.

Grosjean v. American Press Co., 297 U.S. 233 (1936), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court over a challenge to a separate sales tax on newspapers with circulation of over 20,000.

Brown v. Mississippi, 297 U.S. 278 (1936), was a United States Supreme Court case that ruled that a defendant's involuntary confession that is extracted by the use of force on the part of law enforcement cannot be entered as evidence and violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 297 U.S. 288 (1936), was a United States Supreme Court case that provided the first elaboration of the doctrine of "Constitutional avoidance".

Washington v. Oregon, 297 U.S. 517 (1936), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that a state has the power to divert all rivers within its borders. The dispute was over the Walla Walla River.

Two Supreme Court cases, Wisconsin v. Michigan, 295 U.S. 455 (1935) and Wisconsin v. Michigan, 297 U.S. 547 (1936), settled a territorial dispute between Wisconsin and Michigan.

Pacific States Box & Basket Co. v. White, 296 U.S. 176 (1935), was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court.

Fox Film Corp. v. Muller, 296 U.S. 207 (1935), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that it cannot exert certiorari jurisdiction over a case in which there is an adequate and independent state law ground for the state court's final judgment.

United States v. Constantine, 296 U.S. 287 (1935), was a case before the United States Supreme Court that concerned liquor laws and taxation. Congress placed a tax on liquor dealers who violate state liquor laws. The Court struck down the relevant portion of the Revenue Act of 1926 as an attempt to punish a state violation through taxation.

Grovey v. Townsend, 295 U.S. 45 (1935), was a United States Supreme Court decision that held a reformulation of Texas's white primaries system to be constitutional. The case was the third in a series of Court decisions known as the "Texas primary cases". In Nixon v. Herndon (1927), Lawrence A. Nixon sued for damages under federal civil rights laws after being denied a ballot in a Democratic party primary election on the basis of race. The Court found in his favor on the basis of the Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees equal protection under the law, while not discussing his Fifteenth Amendment claim. After Texas amended its statute to authorize the political party's state executive committee to set voting qualifications, Nixon sued again; in Nixon v.

United States v. Creek Nation, 295 U.S. 103 (1935), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the compensation for land taken from the Creek Nation by the United States was the value of the land at the time of the taking, plus interest.

United States v. Mack, 295 U.S. 480 (1935), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment eliminated the state's authority to pursue criminal sanctions for violations; private parties' ability to condition contractual liability on the Eighteenth Amendment was unaffected.

A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States, 295 U.S. 495 (1935), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that invalidated regulations of the poultry industry according to the nondelegation doctrine and as an invalid use of Congress' power under the Commerce Clause. This unanimous decision rendered parts of the National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933 (NIRA), a main component of President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, unconstitutional. The case from which the ruling stemmed was nicknamed the "Sick Chicken Case".

Louisville Joint Stock Land Bank v. Radford, 295 U.S. 555 (1935), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that the Frazier–Lemke Farm Bankruptcy Act was an unconstitutional violation of the Fifth Amendment Takings Clause because it interfered with farmers' property rights in contracts they made with the United States. This unanimous decision was one of the Court's many rulings that overturned President Roosevelt's New Deal.

Humphrey's Executor v. United States, 295 U.S. 602 (1935), is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that ruled that the U.S. Congress may limit the power of the President of the United States to fire certain government officials, even though the president is the chief executive of the U.S. government. The Court ruled that the U.S. Constitution allows Congress to restrict the President's authority to dismiss the leaders of independent agencies that are "quasi-legislative" or "quasi-judicial" in nature. The case stemmed from President Franklin D. Roosevelt's 1933 dismissal of William E. Humphrey as a commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

Jurney v. MacCracken, 294 U.S. 125 (1935), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that Congress has an implicit power to find one in contempt of Congress. During a Senate investigation of airlines and of the U.S. Postmaster General, the attorney William P. MacCracken, Jr. allowed his clients to destroy subpoenaed documents. After a one-week trial on the Senate floor (presided over by the Vice-President of the United States, acting as Senate President), MacCracken, a lawyer and former Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Aeronautics, was found guilty and sentenced to 10 days imprisonment. MacCracken filed a petition of habeas corpus with the federal courts to overturn his arrest, but, after litigation, the U.S.

Douglas v. Cunningham, 294 U.S. 207 (1935), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held the Copyright Act of 1909 allowed an award of $5,000 instead of a copyright infringement damages calculation based on the newspaper's circulation.

The Gold Clause Cases were a series of actions brought before the Supreme Court of the United States, in which the court narrowly upheld the Roosevelt administration's adjustment of the gold standard in response to the Great Depression.

Baldwin v. G. A. F. Seelig, Inc., 294 U.S. 511 (1935), was a United States Supreme Court case which held that a state may not regulate intrastate prices by prohibiting the importation of less expensive goods in interstate commerce. It established the principle that one state, in its dealings with another, cannot place itself in economic isolation.

Norris v. Alabama, 294 U.S. 587 (1935), was one of the cases decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that arose out of the trial of the Scottsboro Boys, who were nine African-American teenagers falsely accused of raping two white women in 1931. The Scottsboro trial jury had no African-American members. Several cases were brought to the Supreme Court to debate the constitutionality of all-white juries. Norris v. Alabama centered around Clarence Norris, one of the Scottsboro Boys, and his claim that the jury selection had systematically excluded black members due to racial prejudice.

Patterson v. Alabama, 294 U.S. 600 (1935), was a United States Supreme Court case which held that an African-American defendant is denied due process rights if the jury pool excludes African-Americans.

Continental Illinois National Bank and Trust Co. v. Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad Co., 294 U.S. 648 (1935), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that Congress may use its bankruptcy power to nullify obligations from private contracts that existed before the enaction of the bankruptcy legislation.

Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan, 293 U.S. 388 (1935), also known as the Hot Oil case, was a case in which the US Supreme Court ruled that the Franklin Roosevelt administration's prohibition of interstate and foreign trade in petroleum goods produced in excess of state quotas, the "hot oil" orders adopted under the 1933 National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), was unconstitutional.

Gregory v. Helvering, 293 U.S. 465 (1935), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court concerned with U.S. income tax law. The case is cited as part of the basis for two legal doctrines: the business purpose doctrine and the doctrine of substance over form. The business purpose doctrine is essentially that if a transaction has no substantial business purpose other than the avoidance or reduction of Federal tax, the tax law will not regard the transaction. The doctrine of substance over form is essentially that for Federal tax purposes, a taxpayer is bound by the economic substance of a transaction if the economic substance varies from its legal form.

Dimick v. Schiedt, 293 U.S. 474 (1935), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that additur is a violation of the Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution. Additur is the practice of a trial judge adding damages additional to the original amount awarded by the jury.

Hamilton v. Regents of the University of California, 293 U.S. 245 (1934), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld the "right of California to force its university students to take classes in military training" and reiterated that "[i]nstruction in military science is not instruction in the practice or tenets of a religion." It was also held that the University of California constituted a corporation created by the state to administer the University, its president, and its provost, and as held is a constitutional department or function of the state government and as such an order by the regents is in effect a statute or law of the state.

George v. Victor Talking Machine Co., 293 U.S. 377 (1934), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held the district court's ruling of infringement of a song's common law copyright, granting an injunction so that damages could be determined, was interlocutory. The appeal came too late, so the Court vacated the appeal.

Lynch v. United States, 292 U.S. 571 (1934), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that people can have property interests in contractual agreements with the United States that are protected by due process. Accordingly, Congress cannot reduce expenditures by repudiating and abrogating the contractual obligations of the United States.

Snyder v. Massachusetts, 291 U.S. 97 (1934), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that denying a criminal defendant permission to attend a viewing of the scene of the crime is not a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of due process.

United States v. Chambers, 291 U.S. 217 (1934), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that federal courts lost jurisdiction over National Prohibition Act prosecutions when the Eighteenth Amendment was repealed, so all proceedings either ongoing or on appeal were void.

Alabama v. Arizona, 291 U.S. 286 (1934), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that Alabama's investment in prison labor does not make its opposition to another states' laws limiting the sale of prison-made-goods justiciable.

Nebbia v. New York, 291 U.S. 502 (1934), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States decided that New York State could regulate the price of milk for dairy farmers, dealers, and retailers.

Home Building & Loan Association v. Blaisdell, 290 U.S. 398 (1934), also called the Minnesota Mortgage Moratorium Case, was a decision of the United States Supreme Court holding that Minnesota's suspension of creditors' remedies was not in violation of the Contract Clause of the United States Constitution. Blaisdell was decided during the depth of the Great Depression and has been criticized by modern conservative and libertarian commentators.

Burroughs v. United States, 290 U.S. 534 (1934), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld as constitutional the financial disclosure and reporting requirements of the Federal Corrupt Practices Act. The court also held that certain counts incorporated by description in other counts of an indictment may be considered in determining the adequacy of the original certain counts.

Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111 (1933), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court on the difference between business and personal expenses and the difference between ordinary business deductions and capital expenses. It is one of the most important income tax law cases.

Hurn v. Oursler, 289 U.S. 238 (1933), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a significant federal question raised by a suit can give jurisdiction to federal courts. If the federal question is rejected on the merits, the federal court still has jurisdiction to decide the local question on the merits. The case being discussed was a copyright infringement suit. In United States v. United States Gypsum Co., the Court's majority opinion referred to Hurn v. Oursler in passing. Justice Felix Frankfurter expanded this and recounted the case's background in his concurrence as a key point in his argument.

O'Donoghue v. United States (consolidated with Hitz v. United States), 289 U.S. 516 (1933), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that courts in the District of Columbia judiciary can be both Article III courts and Article I tribunals at the same time. The two courts at issue in O'Donoghue were a court of general jurisdiction called the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia (now the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia) and a court of appellate jurisdiction called the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia (now the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit). When O'Donoghue was decided, these courts handled cases arising under either federal or local law.

Williams v. United States, 289 U.S. 553 (1933), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the United States Court of Claims was an Article I tribunal. Because the Court of Claims was not an Article III court, Congress could lower its judges' wages without considering the Compensation Clause. In 1962, the Supreme Court overruled Williams in Glidden Co. v. Zdanok (1962), holding that this court is an Article III court.

Vermont v. New Hampshire, 289 U.S. 593 (1933), was a United States Supreme Court case holding that the boundary between Vermont and New Hampshire is neither the thread of the channel of the Connecticut River nor the top of the west bank of the river, but rather the west bank of the river at the mean low-water mark.

Louis K. Liggett Co. v. Lee, 288 U.S. 517 (1933), is a corporate law decision from the United States Supreme Court.

Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932), is a landmark United States Supreme Court decision in which the Court reversed the convictions of nine young black teenagers for allegedly raping two white women on a freight train near Scottsboro, Alabama. The majority of the Court reasoned that the right to retain and be represented by a lawyer was fundamental to a fair trial and that at least in some circumstances, the trial judge must inform a defendant of this right. In addition, if the defendant cannot afford a lawyer, the court must appoint one sufficiently far in advance of trial to permit the lawyer to prepare adequately for the trial.

Sorrells v. United States, 287 U.S. 435 (1932), is a Supreme Court case in which the justices unanimously recognized the entrapment defense. However, while the majority opinion by Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes located the key to entrapment in the defendant's predisposition or lack thereof to commit the crime, Owen Roberts' concurring opinion proposed instead that it be rooted in an analysis of the conduct of the law enforcement agents making the arrest. Although the Court has stuck with predisposition, the dispute has hung over entrapment jurisprudence ever since.

United States v. Smith, 286 U.S. 6 (1932), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court in which the Court held that, after the United States Senate has confirmed the appointment of an officer of the United States and the President has issued the officer's commission, the Senate is without power to revoke its approval.

Nixon v. Condon, 286 U.S. 73 (1932), was a voting rights case decided by the United States Supreme Court, which found the all-white Democratic Party primary in Texas unconstitutional. This was one of four cases brought to challenge the Texas all-white Democratic Party primary. All challenges were supported by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). With Smith v. Allwright (1944) the Supreme Court decisively prohibited the white primary.