Today in Supreme Court History: April 18

Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (decided April 18, 1960): record of competency hearing too sparse to evaluate; conviction (for kidnapping girl and transporting her across state lines) vacated and new competency hearing ordered prior to new trial (no Double Jeopardy, apparently) (the psychiatric report, in 271 F.2d 385, seems complete to me, opines that he doesn’t understand the nature of the proceedings)

Block v. Hirsh, 256 U.S. 135 (decided April 18, 1921): statute restricting conditions for eviction was exercise of police power and not a “taking” requiring compensation due to wartime housing shortage as declared by Congress (“a declaration by a legislature concerning public conditions that by necessity and duty it must know, is entitled at least to great respect”)

Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Haeger, 581 U.S. 101 (decided April 18, 2017): trial court’s sanctions against party for bad-faith litigation conduct is limited to award of legal costs; lawsuit was not “permeated” by refusal to produce test results re: allegedly defective tire

Mohamad v. Palestinian Authority, 566 U.S. 449 (decided April 18, 2012): only individuals, not nations or organizations, can be sued under the Torture Victim Prevention Act (dismissing suit against Palestinian Authority and the PLO for torture and murder of family members)

New York v. New Jersey, 598 U.S. 218 (decided April 18, 2023): New Jersey can secede (my term!) from compact with New York; compact is a contract and with no terms dealing with termination or withdrawal, usual at-will rule applies (this is the Waterfront Commission Compact, formed in 1951 to deal with corruption, but by now almost all waterfront activity is on the New Jersey side)

Kappos v. Hyatt, 566 U.S. 431 (decided April 18, 2012): Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Rules of Evidence apply to patent suits; federal court can be presented with evidence not presented before Board of Patent Appeals (applicant, who was trying to patent “Improved Memory Architecture” software, had forgotten to submit it to the Board -- ha!)

Easley v. Cromartie, 532 U.S. 234 (decided April 18, 2001): whether redistricting was due to race (not o.k.) or political gerrymandering (o.k.) to be determined only after trial, not on motion for summary judgment

Heintz v. Jenkins, 514 U.S. 291 (decided April 18, 1995): liability under Fair Debt Collection Act extends to collection lawyers (the infraction seems minor: in notifying defaulting car buyer of amount owed, lawyer cited wrong cost of insurance bank had to obtain)

Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc., 514 U.S. 211 (decided April 18, 1995): violation of separation of powers for Congress to require courts to reopen (actually one should just say “open”) final judgments (here, as to securities fraud suits dismissed under prior version of §10(b))

Elfbrandt v. Russell, 384 U.S. 11 (decided April 18, 1966): striking down loyalty oath on Free Association grounds because one can belong to a defined “subversive” organization for non-subversive reasons (e.g., membership in Soviet scientific society)

Brookhart v. Janis, 384 U.S. 1 (decided April 18, 1966): right to trial violated when counsel (not defendant himself) agreed to guilty verdict; prosecution made out its case but no objection to damaging hearsay