http://www.oyez.org/cases/1983/podcast U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments, presented by The Oyez Project (www.oyez.org) en The Oyez Project at Chicago-Kent http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_2140/argument None Wed, 25 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81662 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_916/argument None Wed, 25 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81561 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_850/argument Defendants James Karo, Richard Horton, and William Harley ordered fifty gallons of ether from a government informant, to be used to extract cocaine from clothes imported into the United States. Carl Muehlenweg, the informant and owner of the ether, gave consent to the police to install a tracking device into one of the cans containing the ether before delivery to the defendants. Wed, 25 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81636 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_904/argument None Wed, 25 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81519 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_436/argument None Tue, 24 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81574 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_747/argument None Tue, 24 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81567 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_458/argument None Tue, 24 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81550 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_614/argument None Tue, 24 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81632 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_276/argument Part of the Department of Defense Authorization Act of 1983 denied federal financial aid to males between the ages of 18 and 26 who had failed to register for selective service. Applicants for financial aid were required to inform their universities that they had (or had not) registered for the draft. Mon, 23 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81601 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1330/argument None Mon, 23 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81651 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_226/argument None Mon, 23 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81605 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_838/argument None Mon, 23 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81529 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_491/argument Respondents Adan Lopez-Mendoza and Elias Sandoval-Sanchez, both Mexican citizens, were ordered deported by an immigration judge in separate proceedings. The orders were issued based upon each respondent's admission to Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) officials that he had entered the country unlawfully. Lopez-Mendoza and Sandoval-Sanchez challenged the orders on grounds that their respective arrests by INS officials were illegal and in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Sandoval-Sanchez further moved to have his admission suppressed as fruit of an illegal arrest. (Lopez-Mendoza did not move to strike his admission from the record.) In each case, the presiding judge found the legality of the arrests irrelevant to the determination of the respondents' deportation status. On administrative appeal, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed the orders noting that deportation proceedings are civil actions and "[t]he mere fact of an illegal arrest has no bearing on a subsequent deportation hearing." The BIA also found application of the exclusionary rule in a deportation proceeding inappropriate. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed finding the respondents' arrests were illegal and the resulting admissions fruit of unlawful arrests. Wed, 18 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81537 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_724/argument According to its bylaws, membership in the United States Jaycees was limited to males between the ages of eighteen and thirty-five. Females and older males were limited to associate membership in which they were prevented from voting or holding local or national office. Two chapters of the Jaycees in Minnesota, contrary to the bylaws, admitted women as full members. When the national organization revoked the chapters' licenses, they filed a discrimination claim under a Minnesota anti-discrimination law. The national organization brought a lawsuit against Kathryn Roberts of the Minnesota Department of Human Rights, who was responsible for the enforcement of the anti-discrimination law. Wed, 18 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81594 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_305/argument None Wed, 18 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81547 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_710/argument None Wed, 18 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81526 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_372/argument None Tue, 17 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81512 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_751/argument None Tue, 17 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81556 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_5596/argument None Tue, 17 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81588 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_297/argument None Tue, 17 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81518 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_558/argument None Mon, 16 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81665 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_490/argument None Mon, 16 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81645 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_245/argument None Mon, 16 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81635 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_328/argument None Mon, 16 Apr 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81650 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_712/argument T.L.O. was a fourteen-year-old; she was accused of smoking in the girls' bathroom of her high school. A principal at the school questioned her and searched her purse, yielding a bag of marijuana and other drug paraphernalia. Wed, 28 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81538 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_712/reargument T.L.O. was a fourteen-year-old; she was accused of smoking in the girls' bathroom of her high school. A principal at the school questioned her and searched her purse, yielding a bag of marijuana and other drug paraphernalia. Wed, 28 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81687 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_630/argument None Wed, 28 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81614 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_2120/argument None Wed, 28 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81646 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_317/argument None Wed, 28 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81540 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_218/argument None Tue, 27 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81640 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_321/argument Acting under court authorization, Georgia police placed wiretaps on a number of phones and conducted searches pursuant to an investigation of illegal gambling. A number of people were indicted as a result of the investigation. The defendants moved to suppress the wiretaps and the evidence seized during the searches. Because the wiretap evidence related to alleged offenders not then on trial, Georgia moved to close to the public any hearing on the motion to suppress. A trial court upheld Georgia's move to close the hearing. Tue, 27 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81548 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_620/argument None Tue, 27 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81546 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_346/argument None Tue, 27 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81543 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_264/argument None Mon, 26 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81523 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_2056/argument None Mon, 26 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81641 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_498/argument None Mon, 26 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81631 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_141/argument After extensive hearings in the mid-1960s, the Hawaii legislature discovered that while Federal and State governments owned nearly 49 percent of the land in Hawaii, another 47 percent was owned by only 72 private landowners. To combat this concentration of ownership, the legislature enacted the Land Reform Act of 1967. The Act adopted a method of redistribution in which title in real property could be taken from lessors and transferred to lessees. Frank E. Midkiff, a landholder, challenged the Act. Mon, 26 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81604 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_18/reargument Dun and Bradstreet, a credit reporting agency, mistakenly reported to some of its subscribers that the construction contractor Greenmoss Builders had voluntarily filed for bankruptcy. The president of Greenmoss quickly learned about the erroneous report, requested Bradstreet to correct its error, and asked for the list of subscribers who received the report. Bradstreet refused to release the names on the list, but issued a correction to its five subscribers who received the original report. The correction stated that actually a former employee of Greenmoss had filed for bankruptcy and that Greenmoss Builders "continued in business as usual." Greenmoss was dissatisfied with the correction and again asked for the list. When Bradstreet refused a second time, Greenmoss filed suit against it for defamation in a Vermont state court. The court discovered that a 17-year-old high student interning for Bradstreet had caused the error and the jury awarded $350,000 to Greenmoss in compensatory and punitive damages. Bradstreet claimed that contrary to the Supreme Court's ruling in Gertz v. Robert Welch, the trial judge told the jury that it could award punitive damages even if Bradford did not make mistakes intentionally or out of recklessness. The court granted Bradstreet's motion for retrial, but the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that Gertz only applied to cases involving defamation by the media. Wed, 21 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81686 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1766/argument None Wed, 21 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81598 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1998/argument In 1982, the National Park Service issued a renewable permit to the Community for Creative Non-Violence to conduct a demonstration in Lafayette Park and the Mall in Washington, D.C. The C.C.N.V. demonstration was intended to represent the plight of the homeless, and the demonstrators wished to sleep in tent cities set up in the park. Citing anti-camping regulations, the Park Service denied the request. Wed, 21 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81581 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_371/argument None Wed, 21 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81611 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_18/argument Dun and Bradstreet, a credit reporting agency, mistakenly reported to some of its subscribers that the construction contractor Greenmoss Builders had voluntarily filed for bankruptcy. The president of Greenmoss quickly learned about the erroneous report, requested Bradstreet to correct its error, and asked for the list of subscribers who received the report. Bradstreet refused to release the names on the list, but issued a correction to its five subscribers who received the original report. The correction stated that actually a former employee of Greenmoss had filed for bankruptcy and that Greenmoss Builders "continued in business as usual." Greenmoss was dissatisfied with the correction and again asked for the list. When Bradstreet refused a second time, Greenmoss filed suit against it for defamation in a Vermont state court. The court discovered that a 17-year-old high student interning for Bradstreet had caused the error and the jury awarded $350,000 to Greenmoss in compensatory and punitive damages. Bradstreet claimed that contrary to the Supreme Court's ruling in Gertz v. Robert Welch, the trial judge told the jury that it could award punitive damages even if Bradford did not make mistakes intentionally or out of recklessness. The court granted Bradstreet's motion for retrial, but the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that Gertz only applied to cases involving defamation by the media. Wed, 21 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81565 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_271/argument None Tue, 20 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81521 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_173/argument None Tue, 20 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81514 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_128/argument None Tue, 20 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81575 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_2113/argument None Tue, 20 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81536 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1577/argument None Mon, 19 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81539 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1913/reargument The San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority (SAMTA), the main provider of transportation in the San Antonio metropolitan area, claimed it was exempt from the minimum-wage and overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act. SAMTA argued that it was providing a "traditional" governmental function, which exempted it from federal controls according to the doctrine of federalism established in National League of Cities v. Usery (1976). Joe G. Garcia, an employee of SAMTA, brought suit for overtime pay under Fair Labor Standards Act. Mon, 19 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81685 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1913/argument The San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority (SAMTA), the main provider of transportation in the San Antonio metropolitan area, claimed it was exempt from the minimum-wage and overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act. SAMTA argued that it was providing a "traditional" governmental function, which exempted it from federal controls according to the doctrine of federalism established in National League of Cities v. Usery (1976). Joe G. Garcia, an employee of SAMTA, brought suit for overtime pay under Fair Labor Standards Act. Mon, 19 Mar 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81615 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1608/argument None Wed, 29 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81541 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_708/argument None Wed, 29 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81637 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1005/argument None Wed, 29 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81666 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_81_757/argument In an effort to curb racially discriminatory practices in private schools, the Internal Revenue Code denies tax-exempt status to schools which promote such practices. The Code also prohibits individuals from making tax-deductible donations to private schools which racially discriminate. Inez Wright and others filed a nationwide class action suit arguing that the IRS had not fulfilled its obligations in enforcing these provisions of the Code, and thus, that government was subsidizing and encouraging the expansion of segregated education in private schools. This case was decided together with Reagan v. Wright. Wed, 29 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81549 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_95/argument None Tue, 28 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81534 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_87/argument None Tue, 28 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81655 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_6840/argument None Tue, 28 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81563 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_1/argument None Tue, 28 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81618 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1772/argument None Mon, 27 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81552 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_219/argument None Mon, 27 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81531 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_196/argument None Mon, 27 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81597 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_56/argument None Mon, 27 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81661 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1988/argument None Wed, 22 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81619 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1994/argument None Wed, 22 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81570 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1734/argument Anthony and Linda Sidoti, both Caucasians, were divorced and Linda was awarded custody of their daughter. One year later, Anthony sought custody of the child after Linda began cohabitating with Clarence Palmore, an African-American. The Florida courts awarded Mr. Sidoti custody of the child, arguing that the child would be more vulnerable to social stigmatization in a racially mixed household. No evidence was introduced that indicated Ms. Sidoti was unfit to continue the custody of the child. Wed, 22 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81528 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_96/argument None Wed, 22 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81585 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1721/argument None Tue, 21 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81626 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1579/argument None Tue, 21 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81591 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1860/argument None Tue, 21 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81596 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1795/argument In 1980, Oklahoma's Attorney General determined that the re-broadcasting of out-of-state alcoholic beverage commercials by Oklahoma cable television stations violated the State's ban against advertising alcoholic beverages. Richard Crisp, the Director of Oklahoma's Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, warned the offending cable operators that their continued transmission of banned beverage commercials would result in criminal prosecution. In response, and on behalf of other cable operators, Capital Cities Cable challenged the constitutionality of Oklahoma's advertising ban. On appeal from the Tenth Circuit's reversal of a district court decision favoring Capital Cities Cable, the Supreme Court granted certiorari. Tue, 21 Feb 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81583 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1213/argument After receiving the description of Quarles, an alleged assailant, a police officer entered a supermarket, spotted him, and ordered him to stop. Quarles stopped and was frisked by the officer. Upon detecting an empty shoulder holster, the officer asked Quarles where his gun was. Quarles responded. The officer then formally arrested Quarles and read him his Miranda rights. Wed, 18 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81566 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1724/argument None Wed, 18 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81616 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1651/argument Williams was arrested for the murder of a ten-year-old girl who's body he disposed of along a gravel road. State law enforcement officials engaged in a massive search for the child's body. During the search, after responding to an officer's appeal for assistance, Williams made statements to the police (without an attorney present) which helped lead the searchers to the child's body. The defendant's Miranda rights were only read to him after his arrest. Wed, 18 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81648 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1349/argument The Federal Aviation Act of 1958 directs the Secretary of Transportation to "promote the safety of civil aircraft" by establishing minimum standards of airworthiness. Pursuant to this directive, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), acting as the Secretary's designee, instituted a certification process for the design and manufacture of all private aircraft. Under FAA rules, manufacturers are required to develop the plans and specifications and perform the inspections and tests necessary to establish that an aircraft design comports with the regulations. FAA engineers then conduct "spot-check" inspections of the manufacturer's work. This case arose out of two separate accidents in which commercial aircraft, certified by the FAA or its predecessor, caught fire mid-air, resulting in the deaths of most of the people on board one plane and all of the people on board the other. Each accident was found to have been caused by a faulty part a trash receptacle in one case; a gas burning cabin heater in the other which did not comply with FAA regulations. In both cases, plaintiffs sued the U.S. under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) on the ground that the FAA or its predecessor negligently issued certificates for the respective aircraft. The district court in the first case granted summary judgment on the ground, inter alia, that recovery against the U.S. was barred by 28 U.S.C. Section 2680(a), which provides a discretionary function exception to the FTCA. The Ninth Circuit reversed, holding that the discretionary function exception did not apply, and that the U.S., just as a private party, could be held liable for negligent inspection under the California "Good Samaritan" rule. In the other case, the district court entered judgment for plaintiffs under the California "Good Samaritan" rule, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed. Wed, 18 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81629 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1845/argument None Tue, 17 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81630 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1248/argument None Tue, 17 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81652 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1771/argument The exclusionary rule requires that evidence illegally seized must be excluded from criminal trials. Leon was the target of police surveillance based on an anonymous informant's tip. The police applied to a judge for a search warrant of Leon's home based on the evidence from their surveillance. A judge issued the warrant and the police recovered large quantities of illegal drugs. Leon was indicted for violating federal drug laws. A judge concluded that the affadavit for the search warrant was insufficient; it did not establish the probable cause necessary to issue the warrant. Thus, the evidence obtained under the warrant could not be introduced at Leon's trial. Tue, 17 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81560 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_963/argument Boston police sought to obtain a warrant to search the home of Osborne Sheppard, a suspected murderer. Detective Peter O'Malley prepared an affidavit listing the pieces of evidence he hoped to find at Sheppard's home. Since the local court was closed for the weekend and O'Malley could not find a new warrant form, he filled out a previously used form instead. He took this form and the affidavit to the residence of the presiding judge and told him the form required revision and approval. The judge returned the form with his approval, but he did not list the pieces of evidence from the affidavit on the warrant. Police found items from the affidavit in Sheppard's home and charged him with first-degree murder. During Sheppard's trial, the judge stated that the warrant did not conform to Fourth Amendment standards because it did not describe the items to be seized. Because the police acted in good faith upon what they believed was a valid warrant, the judge admitted the items as evidence and Sheppard was convicted. On appeal to the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Sheppard successfully argued that the trial judge should have suppressed the evidence since no "good-faith exception" existed for admitting evidence obtained on a faulty warrant. Tue, 17 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81603 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_86_orig/argument None Mon, 16 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81587 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_912/argument The Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 allocated federal funds to noncommercial television and radio stations to support operations and educational programming. The act did not allow stations receiving money under the act to "engage in editorializing." Mon, 16 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81612 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_687/argument None Mon, 16 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81579 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1474/argument None Mon, 16 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81533 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1271/argument None Wed, 11 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81658 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1616/argument None Wed, 11 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81524 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1565/argument The Hawaii Liquor Tax, enacted in 1939, imposed a twenty percent excise tax on wholesale liquor sales. Certain locally produced alcohol products, such as okolehao brandy and fruit wine, were exempt from the tax. Bacchus Imports, a liquor wholesaler, challenged the law's validity and sought a refund of $45 million from the state of Hawaii. Wed, 11 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81610 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_81_1374/argument None Wed, 11 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81532 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1295/argument None Tue, 10 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81530 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1554/argument David Washington pleaded guilty to murder in a Florida state court. At sentencing, his attorney did not seek out character witnesses or request a psychiatric evaluation. Subsequently, the trial court sentenced Mr. Washington to death finding no mitigating circumstances to rule otherwise. After exhausting his state court remedies, Mr. Strickland sought habeas corpus relief in a Florida federal district court. He argued that his Sixth Amendment right was violated because he had ineffective assistance of counsel at sentencing. The district court denied the petition. On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed. The court held that the Sixth Amendment accorded criminal defendants a right to counsel rendering "reasonably effective assistance given the totality of the circumstances." It then remanded the case to the district court to apply this standard and determine whether Mr. Washington's counsel was sufficiently prejudicial to justify the reversal of his sentence. Tue, 10 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81659 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_660/argument None Tue, 10 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81639 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1643/argument None Tue, 10 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81572 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1150/argument None Mon, 09 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81569 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1071/argument None Mon, 09 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81621 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_80_orig/argument None Mon, 09 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81558 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_432/argument None Mon, 09 Jan 1984 13:00:00 +0000 81590 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_786/argument None Wed, 07 Dec 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81573 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1630/argument Russell Palmer, a prisoner in a Virginia prison, brought suit against Ted Hudson, an officer at the institution. Hudson had conducted a "shakedown" search of Palmer's locker and cell for contraband. Hudson and another officer also charged Palmer with destroying state property after they discovered a ripped pillowcase near Palmer's cell bunk. Palmer was then ordered to reimburse the State. Wed, 07 Dec 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81613 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1253/argument None Wed, 07 Dec 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81617 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1167/argument None Wed, 07 Dec 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81522 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_206/argument None Tue, 06 Dec 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81555 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1479/argument None Tue, 06 Dec 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81602 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_945/argument None Tue, 06 Dec 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81517 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_973/argument None Tue, 06 Dec 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81568 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1050/argument Congress responded to the Court's decision in Califano v. Goldfarb (1977), which invalidated a gender-based dependency requirement in the allocation of Social Security payments, and to the necessity of preventing bankruptcy in the Social Security fund. It enacted amendments in 1977 to the Social Security Act. The 1977 amendments included a "pension offset" provision which reduced spousal benefits by the amount of certain federal and state pension funds that a Social Security applicant received. However, Congress exempted from this provision spouses who were eligible to receive pension benefits prior to December 1982 and who would have qualified for unreduced spousal benefits prior to the Court's Califano decision. Mon, 05 Dec 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81609 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1260/argument None Mon, 05 Dec 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81535 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_914/argument None Mon, 05 Dec 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81660 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1371/argument Title II of the Social Security Act (Act) establishes a four-step review process of disputed disability benefit claims. First, a state agency determines if a claimant has a disability and when the condition began or ended. Second, state agencies' disability determinations can be reviewed upon the claimant's request. Third, if upon review the claimant suffers an adverse finding he or she may demand an evidentiary hearing by an administrative law judge. Fourth, if a claimant is dissatisfied with the administrative law judge's decision, they may appeal to the Appeals Council of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Claiming delays in excess of 90 days, during steps two and three, Leon Day sued on behalf of several similarly aggrieved Vermont claimants alleging a violation of the "reasonable time" hearing limitation. On appeal from the Second Circuit Court of Appeal's ruling upholding a district court's imposition of disability hearing deadlines, the Supreme Court granted HHS Secretary Margaret Heckler certiorari. Mon, 05 Dec 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81657 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_874/argument None Wed, 30 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81644 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1186/argument None Wed, 30 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81592 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_374/argument None Wed, 30 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81664 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1047/argument None Wed, 30 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81647 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_862/argument None Tue, 29 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81559 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1684/argument None Tue, 29 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81513 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_792/argument Grove City College, a private, coeducational liberal arts school, sought to preserve its institutional autonomy by consistently refusing state and federal financial assistance. The College did, however, enroll a large number of students who received Basic Educational Opportunity Grants (BEOG's) through a Department of Education-run program. The DOE concluded that this assistance to students qualified the College as a recipient of federal assistance and made it subject to the nondiscrimination requirements of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. When the College refused to comply with the requirements, the DOE attempted to terminate assistance to the student financial aid program. The College challenged the DOE's actions. Tue, 29 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81589 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_629/argument None Tue, 29 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81593 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_81_2110/argument None Mon, 28 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81576 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_958/argument None Mon, 28 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81580 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_81_2149/argument None Mon, 28 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81634 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1453/argument None Mon, 28 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81557 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1135/argument None Wed, 09 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81633 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_729/argument None Wed, 09 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81577 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_15/argument None Wed, 09 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81595 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_5298/argument None Wed, 09 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81663 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_485/argument Kathy Keeton (Keeton) sued Hustler Magazine, Inc. (Hustler) and several other defendants for libel in the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire. Keeton alleged that the district court had jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship since she was a resident of New York and Hustler was an Ohio corporation with its principal place of business in California. Hustler sold 10 to 15 thousand copies of its magazine in New Hampshire each month but Keeton's only connection to New Hampshire was the circulation there of copies of a magazine that she assisted in producing. She chose to sue in New Hampshire because it was the only state in which the statute of limitation for libel six years, the longest in the United States had not run. The district court dismissed the suit on the ground that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment forbade the application of New Hampshire's long-arm statute in order to acquire personal jurisdiction over Hustler. The First Circuit affirmed, finding that Keeton's contacts with New Hampshire were too attenuated for an assertion of personal jurisdiction over Hustler. The Court of Appeals also found the application of the "single publication rule," which would require the court to award Keeton damages caused in all states should she prevail, unfair since most of Keeton's alleged injuries occurred outside of New Hampshire. Tue, 08 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81520 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1246/argument Bose Corporation, a loudspeaker manufacturer, brought a product disparagement action against Consumer Union for publishing a negative review of Bose products. Among other comments, Consumer Union's article mistakenly said that Bose loudspeakers caused sounds of individual musical instruments to wander "about the room" when they in fact merely wondered "along the wall[s]." Ruling in favor of Bose, the District Court found that the article's statements were factually wrong and made with "actual malice." On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed as it found the lower court's ruling to be clearly erroneous. The Supreme Court granted Bose certiorari. Tue, 08 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81649 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1401/argument None Tue, 08 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81525 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1127/argument None Tue, 08 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81654 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_960/argument None Mon, 07 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81516 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_618/argument None Mon, 07 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81624 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1200/argument None Mon, 07 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81571 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1095/argument None Mon, 07 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81586 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1448/argument None Wed, 02 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81562 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1031/argument None Wed, 02 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81600 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_849/argument None Wed, 02 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81554 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1432/argument None Wed, 02 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81515 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1041/argument None Tue, 01 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81542 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1326/argument None Tue, 01 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81653 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_898/argument None Tue, 01 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81607 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_81_2394/argument None Tue, 01 Nov 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81643 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_825/argument None Mon, 31 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81623 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_282/argument None Mon, 31 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81564 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_766/argument None Mon, 31 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81628 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_940/argument None Mon, 31 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81551 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_556/argument None Wed, 12 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81620 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_827/argument None Wed, 12 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81599 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_5279/argument None Wed, 12 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81553 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_975/argument None Wed, 12 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81642 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_799/argument None Tue, 11 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81545 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_599/argument None Tue, 11 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81627 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_818/argument None Tue, 11 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81606 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_738/argument None Tue, 11 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81625 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_357/argument None Wed, 05 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81584 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_94_orig/argument None Wed, 05 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81638 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_5466/argument None Wed, 05 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81667 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_472/argument None Wed, 05 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81622 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_500/argument None Tue, 04 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81544 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_585/argument None Tue, 04 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81527 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_1256/argument The city of Pawtucket, Rhode Island, annually erected a Christmas display located in the city's shopping district. The display included such objects as a Santa Claus house, a Christmas tree, a banner reading "Seasons Greetings," and a nativity scene. The creche had been included in the display for over 40 years. Daniel Donnelly objected to the display and took action against Dennis Lynch, the Mayor of Pawtucket. Tue, 04 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81656 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_81_2159/argument None Tue, 04 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81582 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_81_2332/argument None Mon, 03 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81608 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_91/argument None Mon, 03 Oct 1983 13:00:00 +0000 81578 at http://www.oyez.org