Skip to main content
Supreme Court Case TrackerThe Court, in plain English

By term

October Term 2015 (2015–2016)

51 casesRecap
  • Before Arguments0
  • Awaiting Decision0
  • Decided51
  • Dismissed0
51 of 51 tracked cases in October Term 2015 (2015–2016) have a decision on the record.

Term tracker

Every published case, by stage

Decided Cases

51
DecidedHealth benefits of abortion restrictionsWhole Woman's Health v. HellerstedtWhole Woman’s Health challenged Texas rules requiring abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital and clinics to meet surgical-center standards. The Supreme Court ruled that earlier litigation did not bar the challenge, found both rules created a substantial obstacle to abortions before a fetus could survive outside the womb, and ruled that they violated the Constitution; it overturned the lower-court decisions and sent the case back.Decided 15-274DecidedTribal court authorityDollar General Corporation v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw IndiansDollar General challenged whether the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians’ tribal court could hear a civil tort claim against a nonmember based on a consensual relationship with the tribe or its members. The Supreme Court split evenly and left the Fifth Circuit’s judgment in place, but did not establish a Supreme Court rule resolving the broader jurisdiction question.Decided 13-1496DecidedPower to delay deportationsUnited States v. TexasTexas and other states challenged the federal Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) program, raising questions about their right to sue and whether the program violated federal law or the Constitution. The Supreme Court split evenly and left the lower court’s judgment in place (affirmed), without a majority ruling on those legal questions.Decided 15-674DecidedRace in college admissionsAbigail Noel Fisher v. University of Texas at AustinAbigail Fisher challenged the University of Texas at Austin’s use of race as one factor when reviewing applications for seats not filled through its Top Ten Percent Plan. The Supreme Court agreed with the lower court that the admissions program in place when Fisher applied was lawful under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.Decided 14-981DecidedU.S. racketeering law abroadRJR Nabisco, Inc. v. European CommunityThe European Community and 26 countries sued RJR Nabisco, alleging money laundering under RICO, a racketeering law. The Supreme Court ruled some RICO rules cover conduct abroad tied to crimes Congress made applicable abroad, but private suits require a U.S. injury; it overturned the appeals court’s ruling and sent the case back there (remanded).Decided 15-138DecidedEvidence from an illegal stopUtah v. StrieffThe Supreme Court overturned the Utah Supreme Court’s ruling and allowed evidence seized after Officer Douglas Fackrell arrested Edward Strieff on a valid, pre-existing warrant, despite the unlawful stop. It said the warrant weakened the link between the stop and the evidence, and that there was no flagrant police misconduct.Decided 14-1373DecidedContracts for veteran-owned businessesKingdomware Technologies, Inc. v. United StatesKingdomware Technologies challenged the Department of Veterans Affairs’ duty to reserve contracts for veteran-owned small businesses when at least two could make reasonable bids. After those contracts were completed, the Court said the dispute could recur but end before review; it ruled the VA must follow the rule, overturned the Federal Circuit, and sent the case back (remanded).Decided 14-916DecidedTribal convictions without lawyersUnited States v. BryantThe Supreme Court ruled that Michael Bryant’s uncounseled tribal-court convictions could count as prior offenses under the federal domestic-assault law because the proceedings complied with the Indian Civil Rights Act. It overturned the appeals court’s ruling and sent the case back for further proceedings (reversed and remanded).Decided 15-420DecidedDouble jeopardy in Puerto RicoCommonwealth of Puerto Rico v. Luis M. Sanchez ValleAfter Luis M. Sanchez Valle was convicted in federal court, Puerto Rico sought to prosecute him for the same conduct under its weapons laws. The Supreme Court agreed with Puerto Rico’s highest court (affirmed) that the Constitution’s protection against being prosecuted twice for the same conduct barred the Puerto Rico prosecution because Puerto Rico and the federal government are not separate sovereigns for this purpose.Decided 15-108DecidedPrison complaint rulesRoss v. BlakeMichael Ross challenged a ruling that Shaidon Blake could avoid the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s grievance requirement because he mistakenly thought an internal investigation satisfied it. The Supreme Court wiped out that ruling (vacated it) and sent the case back to the lower court (remanded) to consider Blake’s claim that the grievance process was not actually available to him.Decided 15-339DecidedState rules blocking appealsDeborah K. Johnson, Warden v. Donna Kay LeeDonna Kay Lee’s case concerned whether California could bar claims left out of a direct appeal from being raised later, even though the rule was not used in some cases where it could have applied. The Supreme Court overturned the Ninth Circuit’s judgment and sent the case back for further proceedings (remanded).Decided 15-789DecidedParole information in death trialsShawn Patrick Lynch v. ArizonaThe case concerned whether due process required Arizona to tell the jury that life without parole was the alternative to a death sentence when Lynch’s future dangerousness was raised. The Court overturned the Arizona Supreme Court’s ruling and sent the case back for further proceedings (remanded).Decided 15-8366DecidedForced resignation filing deadlinesMarvin Green v. Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster GeneralMarvin Green claimed the Postal Service forced him to resign and disputed when the 45-day period to contact an employment counselor began. The Supreme Court ruled that it starts when an employee gives notice of resignation, wiped out the appeals court’s ruling (vacated it), and sent the case back (remanded it) to determine when Green gave notice.Decided 14-613DecidedRace discrimination in jury selectionTimothy Tyrone Foster v. Bruce Chatman, WardenTimothy Foster argued that prosecutors struck Black prospective jurors because of race at his Georgia murder trial. The Supreme Court ruled that the state court was clearly wrong to find he had not shown intentional racial discrimination, overturned its decision (reversed it), and sent the case back to the Georgia courts (remanded).Decided 14-8349DecidedDelays in criminal sentencingBetterman v. MontanaBrandon Betterman argued that a 14-month wait for sentencing after his guilty plea violated his right to a speedy trial. The Supreme Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment’s protection does not cover delays after a guilty plea or guilty verdict and agreed with Montana’s court (affirmed); it did not decide whether the delay violated due process.Decided 14-1457DecidedState crimes and deportationJorge Luna Torres v. Loretta E. Lynch, Attorney GeneralThe Supreme Court ruled that Jorge Luna Torres’s New York arson conviction counted as an immigration-law “aggravated felony”—a category that made him ineligible for discretionary relief from deportation—even though New York’s law lacked the federal arson law’s interstate-commerce requirement. It agreed with the Second Circuit (affirmed).Decided 14-1096DecidedFederal review of state prisoner claimsScott Kernan, Secretary, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation v. Antonio A. HinojosaAntonio Hinojosa challenged California’s denial of his request to contest his custody, raising whether federal courts must give special weight under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) when a state court denies a claim without deciding its substance. The Supreme Court overturned the Ninth Circuit’s judgment; Justices Sotomayor and Ginsburg disagreed, arguing that California’s unexplained denial should be presumed to follow an earlier ruling that Hinojosa filed in the wrong county.Decided 15-833DecidedBirth control coverage exemptionsZubik v. BurwellReligious organizations challenged federal rules for the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive-coverage requirement, arguing that the objection process burdened their religious exercise. The Supreme Court wiped out the appeals-court rulings (vacated them) and sent the cases back to the lower courts (remanded them), without deciding whether the rules violated federal religious-freedom law.Decided 14-1418DecidedFederal courts and securities lawsuitsMerrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. v. Greg ManningEscala Group shareholders sued Merrill Lynch and other financial firms in state court over alleged short selling of Escala stock; the firms argued that the Securities Exchange Act required the case to be heard in federal court. The Supreme Court agreed with the appeals court (affirmed) that the Act uses the same test as the general federal-question law to decide whether a claim depends on federal law, leaving the suit in state court without deciding the firms’ liability.Decided 14-1132DecidedHiding assets to avoid debtHusky Int'l Electronics, Inc. v. RitzHusky International Electronics sought to keep Daniel Ritz from wiping out a debt in bankruptcy, arguing that transfers of assets to hinder creditors counted as “actual fraud.” The Supreme Court ruled that such schemes can count even without a false statement, overturned the appeals court’s ruling, and sent the case back for further proceedings (remanded).Decided 15-145DecidedConspiracy to extort outsidersSamuel Ocasio v. United StatesSamuel Ocasio, a Baltimore police officer, challenged his conspiracy conviction over payments from an auto-repair shop for referrals, arguing that the agreement had to target someone outside the conspiracy. The Supreme Court upheld the Fourth Circuit’s ruling, deciding that he could be convicted based on an agreement with a property owner to obtain money by misusing public office.Decided 14-361DecidedBank Markazi, aka The Central Bank of Iran, Petitioner v. Deborah Peterson, et al.People holding judgments against Iran sought to use nearly $2 billion in bonds in which Bank Markazi held an interest to collect those judgments. The Supreme Court agreed with the appeals court that the law targeting the assets in this case did not violate the separation of powers.Decided 14-770DecidedWrong sentencing rangesSaul Molina-Martinez v. United StatesSaul Molina-Martinez challenged his prison sentence after the sentencing judge used the wrong federal sentencing-guideline range; the Fifth Circuit required extra evidence that the mistake affected his sentence, even though he was sentenced within the correct range. The Supreme Court overturned that ruling and sent the case back to the appeals court (remanded), holding that appeals courts cannot apply a blanket rule requiring extra evidence.Decided 14-8913DecidedWesley W. Harris, et al., Appellants v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, et al.Voters sued the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, arguing that newly drawn voting districts violated the one person, one vote principle by over-populating Republican-leaning districts and under-populating Democratic-leaning ones. The Supreme Court ruled that minor population deviations are constitutional if they result from legitimate considerations, such as a good faith effort to comply with the Voting Rights Act.Decided 14-232DecidedSuing states across state linesFranchise Tax Board of California v. Gilbert P. HyattThe justices split evenly on whether to overrule Nevada v. Hall, so the Supreme Court left the Nevada courts’ decision to hear Gilbert Hyatt’s suit against California’s Franchise Tax Board in place. It ruled Nevada could not impose greater damages on the California agency than it would allow in similar cases against its own agencies, then wiped out the Nevada Supreme Court’s judgment (vacated it) and sent the case back (remanded it).Decided 14-1175DecidedWho counts in districtsSue Evenwel v. Greg Abbott, Governor of TexasSue Evenwel challenged Texas legislative districts drawn using total population, arguing that they should count people eligible to vote instead. The Supreme Court ruled that Texas may use total population and agreed with the lower court (affirmed).Decided 14-940DecidedFrozen assets for legal feesSila Luis v. United StatesThe Supreme Court ruled that before trial, the government cannot freeze a defendant’s lawful assets unrelated to the alleged crime when she needs them to hire a lawyer of her choice. It wiped out the Eleventh Circuit’s ruling (vacated it) and sent the case back to that court (remanded it).Decided 14-419DecidedPublic employee union feesRebecca Friedrichs v. California Teachers AssociationRebecca Friedrichs and other California public school teachers challenged rules allowing unions to collect fees from nonmembers and requiring employees to opt out of paying for certain union speech. The Supreme Court split evenly and left the Ninth Circuit’s judgment in place, without resolving the First Amendment questions.Decided 14-915DecidedOmaha reservation boundariesNebraska v. Mitch ParkerNebraska and owners of businesses selling alcohol in Pender, Nebraska, disputed whether the town remained within the Omaha Reservation after an 1882 law allowed tribal land to be sold. The Supreme Court decided the law did not shrink the reservation and agreed with the lower court (affirmed).Decided 14-1406DecidedClass action evidenceTyson Foods, Inc. v. Peg Bouaphakeo, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly SituatedTyson Foods employees sought overtime for time spent putting on and removing protective gear; Tyson argued that differing work times and uninjured members barred a class case. The Supreme Court agreed the class could proceed and sent the case back (remanded), leaving lower courts to decide how any award should be divided, including whether uninjured members could recover.Decided 14-1146DecidedPark rules on Alaska landsJohn Sturgeon v. Bert Frost, in His Official Capacity as Alaska Regional Director of the National Park ServiceJohn Sturgeon challenged the National Park Service’s authority under the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act to regulate nonfederal land within Alaska park boundaries. The Supreme Court rejected the Ninth Circuit’s interpretation, wiped out its ruling (vacated it), and sent the case back to the lower court (remanded it).Decided 14-1209DecidedSpouses as loan applicantsValerie J. Hawkins and Janice A. Patterson v. Community Bank of RaymoreValerie Hawkins and Janice Patterson personally guaranteed loans Community Bank of Raymore made to a development company whose members included their husbands. The Supreme Court split evenly and left the Eighth Circuit’s judgment in place, without a majority decision on whether the women were protected by the Equal Credit Opportunity Act or whether the Federal Reserve Board could include guarantors in its definition of “applicant.”Decided 14-520DecidedStun guns for self-defenseJaime Caetano v. MassachusettsJaime Caetano challenged her Massachusetts conviction for possessing a stun gun, arguing that the Second Amendment protects having one for self-defense. The Supreme Court wiped out the Massachusetts high court’s judgment (vacated it) and sent the case back for further proceedings (remanded it).Decided 14-10078DecidedRecognizing out-of-state adoptionsV. L. v. E. L.V.L. and E.L. disputed whether Alabama courts had to recognize a Georgia adoption order allowing V.L. to adopt E.L.’s children. The Supreme Court overturned the Alabama Supreme Court’s ruling and sent the case back for further proceedings (remanded).Decided 15-648DecidedWhose citizenship counts for trustsAmericold Realty Trust v. ConAgra Foods, Inc.Food distributors including ConAgra sued Americold over a contract dispute tied to a warehouse fire; Americold sought to move the case to federal court based on its trustees’ citizenship. The Supreme Court agreed with the appeals court (affirmed) that an unincorporated trust’s citizenship for diversity jurisdiction depends on all its members, including shareholder-beneficiaries.Decided 14-1382DecidedWithheld evidence in criminal trialsMichael Wearry v. Burl Cain, WardenMichael Wearry argued that evidence withheld from his murder trial violated his constitutional right to a fair process. The Supreme Court agreed that his rights were violated, overturned the Louisiana post-conviction court’s judgment, and sent the case back for further proceedings (remanded).Decided 14-10008DecidedState health plan reportingAlfred Gobeille, in His Official Capacity as Chair of the Vermont Green Mountain Care Board v. Liberty Mutual Insurance CompanyVermont required health plans, including Liberty Mutual’s self-insured employee plan, to report claims data to the state; Liberty Mutual challenged the rule under the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The Supreme Court agreed with the lower court (affirmed) and decided that ERISA overrides Vermont’s reporting law as applied to ERISA plans.Decided 14-181DecidedRetroactive juvenile life without paroleMontgomery v. LouisianaHenry Montgomery asked Louisiana to apply Miller, which bars mandatory life-without-parole sentences for juveniles convicted of homicide, to his case. The Supreme Court ruled it had authority to review Louisiana’s refusal, overturned the state court’s judgment, and sent the case back to the lower court (remanded).Decided 14-280DecidedBinding Supreme Court rulingsMelene James v. City of Boise, IdahoMelene James sued Boise police officers after a police dog bit her during a response to a burglary call. The U.S. Supreme Court overturned Idaho’s conclusion that Hughes v. Rowe did not bind state courts, deciding that state courts must follow its interpretations of federal law, and sent the case back for further proceedings (remanded).Decided 15-493DecidedRetirement plan investmentsAmgen Inc. v. Steve HarrisAmgen employees said their retirement-plan managers breached their duty to manage the plan carefully by keeping an Amgen-stock fund. The Supreme Court overturned the Ninth Circuit’s ruling and sent the case back to assess whether the complaint plausibly alleged that no careful manager could have concluded an alternative would do more harm than good.Decided 15-278DecidedPausing lawsuit deadlinesMenominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin v. United StatesThe Menominee Tribe sought to pause the deadline for submitting claims against the United States over its health-services contract, arguing that extraordinary circumstances kept it from filing on time. The Supreme Court unanimously agreed with the appeals court that equitable tolling (pausing a filing deadline) did not apply because the Tribe had not shown extraordinary circumstances outside its control.Decided 14-510DecidedComputer crime appealsMichael Musacchio v. United StatesMichael Musacchio argued that the evidence against him should be judged against an extra element mistakenly added to the jury instructions, and that he could raise the deadline for prosecuting him (statute of limitations) for the first time on appeal. The Supreme Court unanimously agreed with the Fifth Circuit that evidence is measured against the charged crime’s statutory elements and Musacchio could not raise that deadline defense for the first time on appeal.Decided 14-1095DecidedInferring motive at trialStephen Duncan, Warden v. Lawrence OwensLawrence Owens challenged his conviction for Ramon Nelson’s killing, asking whether a federal court could grant relief from imprisonment based on a trial judge’s inference about motive without clearly established precedent that the inference violated his right to a fair legal process. The Supreme Court dismissed its grant of review (ended its review of the case) as improvidently granted and did not decide that question.Decided 14-1516DecidedDeath penalty sentencingKansas v. Jonathan D. CarrJonathan Carr challenged the jury instructions on mitigating evidence and the joint sentencing of him and his brother, arguing that both violated the Eighth Amendment. The Supreme Court overturned the Kansas Supreme Court’s ruling in Carr’s case and sent it back to that court (remanded).Decided 14-449DecidedRecovering spent health plan moneyRobert Montanile v. Board of Trustees of the National Elevator Industry Health Benefit PlanThe National Elevator Industry Health Benefit Plan sought repayment from Robert Montanile’s car-accident settlement after paying his medical bills. The Supreme Court ruled that if Montanile had wholly spent the settlement on items that could not be traced, the plan could not collect from his separate assets; it overturned the Eleventh Circuit’s ruling and sent the case back to the lower court (remanded).Decided 14-723DecidedJury role in death sentencesTimothy Lee Hurst v. FloridaTimothy Lee Hurst challenged Florida’s death-sentencing system because it let a judge make findings needed to impose death rather than requiring the jury to make them. The Supreme Court ruled that violated the Sixth Amendment, overturned the Florida Supreme Court’s decision, and sent the case back to that court (remanded).Decided 14-7505DecidedPrisoner filing fee capAntoine Bruce v. Charles E. Samuels, Jr.Antoine Bruce argued that filing-fee deductions for multiple federal cases should be made one at a time, with total monthly payments capped at 20% of his income. The Supreme Court unanimously agreed with the appeals court that payments for each case are collected at the same time, not sequentially.Decided 14-844DecidedDeath penalty jury selectionRandy White, Warden v. Roger L. WheelerRoger Wheeler’s case concerned whether a trial judge could remove a potential juror whose answers about considering the death penalty were unclear. The Supreme Court overturned the Sixth Circuit’s judgment and sent the case back for further proceedings (remanded).Decided 14-1372DecidedState law in arbitration agreementsDIRECTV, Inc. v. Amy ImburgiaAmy Imburgia brought a proposed class action against DIRECTV, alleging that its early-termination fees violated California law. The Supreme Court overturned the California appeals court’s ruling and sent the case back (reversed and remanded), deciding that the Federal Arbitration Act preempts the court’s interpretation and requires enforcement of the arbitration agreement.Decided 14-462DecidedStephen M. Shapiro v. David J. McManus, Jr., Chairman, Maryland State Board of ElectionsStephen Shapiro and other Maryland citizens challenged a congressional redistricting plan, but a single district judge dismissed their claim without convening a three-judge panel. The Supreme Court overturned the dismissal and sent the case back to the lower court (reversed and remanded), ruling that a claim covered by the Three-Judge Court Act must be heard by a three-judge panel.Decided 14-990DecidedDefense lawyers and ballistics evidenceMaryland v. James KulbickiThe Maryland Court of Appeals set aside James Kulbicki’s conviction after finding his lawyers ineffective for not challenging ballistics evidence. The Supreme Court overturned that ruling.Decided 14-848