US Supreme Court Docket
ILLINOIS v. McARTHUR
No. 99-1132
Subject:
Fourth Amendment, Search and Seizure, Securing Dwelling While Awaiting Warrant
Question:
Whether police officers who have probable cause to believe that a residence contains incriminating evidence may
temporarily prevent entry in order to preserve the evidence while they seek a search warrant.
Decisions:
- Illinois Appellate Court - 4th District, Filed: May 7, 1999
- United States Supreme Court, Decided: February 20, 2001
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Oral Argument Transcript From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
-
Parties:
- Petitioner [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Petitioner
- Reply [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
Amicus - Petitioner:
- State of Ohio et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- United States [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
Tennessee Supreme Court - Western Division, Filed: May 24, 1999
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Oral Argument Transcript From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
-
Parties:
- Petitioner [OCR-TEXT]
- Respondent [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Petitioner
- Reply [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
Amicus - Petitioner: - Tennessee Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers [TEXT] [WP] [RTF]
CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INC. v. ADAMS
No. 99-1379
Subject:
Arbitration, Federal Arbitration Act, Employment Contracts
Question:
Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in holding, directly contrary to the holding of every other United States Court
of Appeals, that the Federal Arbitration Act does not apply to contracts of employement?
Decisions:
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit, Filed: November 18, 1999
- United States Supreme Court, Decided: March 21, 2001
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Oral Argument Transcript From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
-
Parties:
- Petitioner [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Respondent
[PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
Amicus - Petitioner:
- Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America [PDF]
Amicus - Respondent:
- United States [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
Subject:
U.S. Congress, Term Limits
Question:
- Do the people violate Article V of the Constitution when they participate in the evolution of their
government by communicating their opinion to federal legislators or by commenting on the ballot to
themselves about the behavior of federal legislative candidates?
- Do the people violate the Qualifications Clauses and the First Amendment when they comment on the ballot
regarding their elected representative's actions and voting record or when they comment on the ballot about
a non-incumbent congressional candidate's silence concerning a prospective constitutional amendment?
- Does the Speech and Debate Clause of the Constitution prohibit the people from commenting on the ballot about their federal legislator's actions and voting record in regard to a prospective constitutional amendment?
Decisions:
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 8th Circuit, Filed: August 31, 1999
- United States Supreme Court, Decided: February 28, 2001
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Oral Argument Transcript From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
-
Parties:
- Petitioner [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Petitioner
- Reply [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
Amicus - Petitioner:
- Initiative and Referendum Institute [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Missouri Term Limits [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Professor Kris W. Kobach [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- State of Nebraska [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- U.S.
PIRG Education Fund [PDF]
[OCR-TEXT]
Amicus - Respondent:
- United States [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
Whitman, Administrator of EPA, et al. v. American Trucking Associations, Inc., et
al.
(Browner, Administrator of EPA v. American Trucking Associations, Inc., et al.)
No. 99-1257
Subject:
Clean Air Act, Environmental Protection Agency, National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Question:
- Whether Section 109 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 7409, as interpreted by the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) in setting revised National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone and
particulate matter, effects an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power.
- Whether the court of appeals exceeded its jurisdiction by reviewing, as a final agency action that is ripe
for review, EPA's preliminary preamble statements on the scope of the agency's authority to implement the
revised "eight-hour" ozone NAAQS.
- Whether provisions of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 specifically aimed at achieving the long-delayed attainment of the then-existing ozone NAAQS restrict EPA's general authority under other provisions of the CAA to implement a new and more protective ozone NAAQS until the prior standard is attained.
Decisions:
- U.S. Court of Appeals - D.C. Circuit, Filed: May 14, 1999
- U.S. Court of Appeals - D.C. Circuit, Filed: October 29, 1999 (Rehearing)
- United States Supreme Court, Decided: February 27, 2001
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Oral Argument Transcript From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
- Why the Supreme Court Truly Matters Today by Marci Hamilton.
Briefs:
-
Parties:
- Petitioner (Petition) [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Petitioner - Appendix (Petition) [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Respondent American Trucking Association, Inc. et al. [PDF]
- Petitioner - Reply (Petition) [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Petitioner [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Respondent American Lung Association [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Respondent American Trucking Association, Inc. et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Respondent Appalachian Power Company et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Respondent Massachusetts et al. [WP] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Respondent State of Ohio et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Petitioner - Reply [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Respondent American Lung Association - Reply [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Respondent Massachusetts et al. - Reply [WP] [TEXT] [RTF]
Amicus - Petitioner:
- Environmental Defense et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- State
of New York et al. [PDF]
[OCR-TEXT]
Amicus - Respondent:
- American Crop Protection Association et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Association of American Physicians & Surgeons et al. [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Commonwealth of Virginia [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- General Electric [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Institute for Justice et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Intel Corporation et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Lincoln Institute for Research and Education et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI Inc. et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Mercatus Center [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Pacific Legal Foundation et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- People for the USA et al. [TEXT] [RTF]
- Professor Gary E. Marchant et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Senator Orrin Hatch et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- State of Virginia [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
AM. TRUCKING ASSNS. v. BROWNER
No. 99-1426
Subject:
Clean Air Act, Environmental Protection Agency, National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Question:
- Whether the court of appeals properly reaffirmed the long-standing principle that, in setting and
revising National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) under Section 109 of the Clean Air Act, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) may not consider the costs, technical feasibility, or other alleged
effects of implementing measures to attain the NAAQS (Nos. 99-1426 and 99-1431).
- Whether the court of appeals properly resolved various claims, by postponing decision or rejecting them outright, that EPA's primary and secondary NAAQS for fine particulate matter (PM2.5) are inadequate to protect public health and welfare (No. 99-1442).
Decisions:
- U.S. Court of Appeals - D.C. Circuit, Filed: May 14, 1999
- U.S. Court of Appeals - D.C. Circuit, Filed: October 29, 1999 (Rehearing)
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Oral Argument Transcript From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
- Why the Supreme Court Truly Matters Today by Marci Hamilton.
Briefs:
-
Parties:
- American Trucking Associations, Inc. et al. (Petition) [PDF]
- Federal Cross-Respondents - Opposition (Petition) [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- American Trucking Associations, Inc. et al. - Reply (Petition) [PDF]
- American Lung Association (Respondent) [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- American Trucking Associations, Inc. et al. (Cross-Petitioners) [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Appalachian Power Company et al. (Respondent) for Petitioners [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Citizens for Balanced Transportation (Respondent) [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Environmental Protection Agency (Federal Respondents) [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- State of Massachusetts et al. (Cross Respondent) [WP] [TEXT] [RTF]
- State of Ohio et al. (Respondent) for Cross-Petitioners [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- State of Ohio et al. (Respondent) for Cross-Petitioners - Reply [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- American Forest & Paper Association et al. - Reply [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- American Trucking Associations, Inc. et al. - Reply [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
Amicus - Cross-Petitioners:
- AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies et al. [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- American Boiler Manufacturers Association [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Commonwealth of Virginia [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- General Electric Company [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Mercatus Center [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Pacific Legal Foundation et al. [PDF] [TEXT]
- Senator James M. Inhofe et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Washington Legal Foundation et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
Amicus - Cross-Respondents:
- Clean Air Trust et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Environmental Defense et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- State of California et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- State of North Carolina [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- U.S. Public Interests Research Group Education Fund [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
UNITED STATES v. MEAD CORP.
No. 99-1434
Subject:
International Trade, U.S. Customs Service, Day Planners, Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the United States
(HTSUS)
Question:
- Whether classification rulings issued by the Customs Service are entitled to deference in determining the
proper tariff classification of imported goods.
- Whether the Customs Service reasonably interpreted the statutory phrase "diaries, notebooks and address books, bound" in Subheading 4820.10.20 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to include the spiral-bound and ring-bound day planners imported by respondent.
Decisions:
- U.S. Court of Appeals - Federal Circuit, Filed: July 28, 1999
- United States Supreme Court, Decided: June 18, 2001
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Oral Argument Transcript From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
-
Parties:
- Petitioner (Petition) [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Petitioner - Reply (Petition) [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Petitioner [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Petitioner [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
Amicus - Petitioner:
- Professor
Thomas W. Merrill [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
Amicus - Respondent:
- United States Association of Importers of Textiles and Apparel et al. [PDF]
EGELHOFF v. EGELHOFF
No. 99-1529
Subject:
ERISA, Preemption, Pension, Life Insurance
Question:
Whether the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. 1001 et seq., preempts a state
law that purports to revoke the designation of beneficiary made pursuant to the terms of an ERISA plan.
Decisions:
- Washington Court of Appeals, Division II, Filed: December 23, 1998
- Washington Supreme Court, Filed: November 18, 1999
- United States Supreme Court, Decided: March 21, 2001
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Oral Argument Transcript From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
-
Parties:
- Respondent (Petition) [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Petitioner [PDF]
- Respondent [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Petitioner - Reply [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
Amicus - Petitioner: - The Boeing Company et al. [PDF]
- National Coordinating Committee for Multiemployer Plans [PDF]
- United States [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
Amicus - Respondent: - National Conference of State Legislatures et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- State of Washington et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
Amicus - Neither Party: - AARP - Reversal [PDF]
HUNT v. CROMARTIE
SMALLWOOD v. CROMARTIE
Nos. 99-1864, 99-1865
Subject:
Voting Districts, Race
Question:
- United States Supreme Court, Decided: April 18, 2001
- Docket Sheet (99-1864) From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Docket Sheet (99-1865) From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Oral Argument Transcript From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
-
Amicus - Appellants:
- American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) [TEXT]
- Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law et al. [PDF]
- United States [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
U.S. Court of Appeals - 7th Circuit, Filed: July 15, 1999 (Unpublished)
Resources:
- Docket Sheet (99-8576) From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Oral Argument Transcript From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
CITY NEWS NOVELTY, INC. v. CITY OF WAUKESHA
No. 99-1680
Subject:
First Amendment, Adult Bookstore, Licensing
Question:
Is a licensing scheme which acts as a prior restraint required to contain explicit language which prevents
injury to a speaker's rights from want of a prompt judicial decision?
Decisions:
- Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Filed: August 18, 1999
- Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Filed: October 20, 1999
- United States Supreme Court, Decided: January 17, 2001
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Oral Argument Transcript From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
- City of Waukesha City Attorney's Office Features statutes, court decisions, and briefs filed in the case.
Briefs:
-
Parties:
- Petitioner (Petition) [PDF]
- Respondent - Reply (Petition) [PDF]
[TEXT] [RTF]
- Petitioner [PDF]
- Respondent [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Petitioner
- Reply [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
Amicus - Petitioner: - American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression et al. [PDF]
- Florida Cannabis Action Network, Inc. [PDF] [TEXT]
- Liberty Project [PDF]
Amicus - Respondent: - Community Defense Counsel [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Morality in Media, Inc. et al. [TEXT] [RTF] [MS-WORD]
- National League of Cities et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- State of Alabama et al. [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- United States [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
DIR. OF REVENUE OF MO v. COBANK ACB
No. 99-1792
Subject:
State Taxation, Exemption, Federally Chartered Instrumentalities
Question:
Whether the State of Missouri, consistently with 12 U.S.C. 2134, may tax the income of the National Bank for
Cooperatives, a federally chartered instrumentality.
Decisions:
- Missouri Supreme Court, Filed: January 25, 2000
- United States Supreme Court, Decided: February 20, 2001
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Oral Argument Transcript From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
-
Parties:
- Respondent [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Petitioner - Reply [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
Amicus - Petitioner: - United States [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
TRAFFIX DEVICES, INC. v. MARKETING DISPLAYS, INC.
No. 99-1571
Subject:
Trademark, Trade Dress
Question:
Whether federal trade dress protection extends to a product configuration -- such as the one at issue in this
case -- covered by an expired utility patent.
Decisions:
- U.S. Court of Appeals - Sixth Circuit, Filed: December 29, 1999
- United States Supreme Court, Decided: March 20, 2001
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Oral Argument Transcript From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
-
Parties:
- Petitioner [PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
- Respondent
[PDF] [OCR-TEXT]
Amicus - Petitioner: - United States [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
LEWIS v. LEWIS & CLARK MARINE, INC.
No. 99-1331
Subject:
Admiralty, Jurisdiction, Jones Act
Question:
- Does the district court abuse its discretion by dissolving the injuction against state court proceedings
in a single claimant limitation of liability case (46 U.S.C.A. §181, et seq. (Supp.1998)) when the claimant
has fully protected the shipowner's right to limitation?
- If so, does the Saving To Suitors Clause of 28 U.S.C.A. §1333(2) (1993) mandate dissolution of the injuction to allow the claimant to proceed with his Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.A. §688 (Supp.1998) case in state court?
- U.S Court of Appeals - 8th Circuit, Filed: November 5, 1999
- United States Supreme Court, Decided: February 21, 2001
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Oral Argument Transcript From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
-
Parties:
- Petitioner [PDF] [TEXT]
- Respondent [PDF] [TEXT]
- Petitioner - Reply [PDF] [TEXT]