top of page
Search

Today in Supreme Court History: January 19

  • Writer: captcrisis
    captcrisis
  • Jan 19, 2025
  • 1 min read

Patsone v. Pennsylvania, 232 U.S. 138 (decided January 19, 1914): upholds statute prohibiting foreign born non-citizens from killing wild game except in defense of person or property (this case has never been overruled)


NASA v. Nelson, 562 U.S. 134 (decided January 19, 2011): upholding NASA regulation requiring even long-term employees to submit to background checks and answer questions about illegal drug use (“if there is a right to private information, it is not violated here”)


United States v. Mueller, 113 U.S. 153 (decided January 19, 1885): builder of new customs house in Chicago entitled to delay costs incurred due to government dithering as to building design


Oyama v. California, 332 U.S. 633 (decided January 19, 1948): leaves in place California statute which in effect prohibited those of Japanese ancestry from owning land, with the result that a father’s gift to his son was invalidated and the land went to the state (majority opinion relies on father’s failure to make some formal filings, but c’mon . . .) (statute soon struck down by the California Supreme Court, Sei Fujii v. State, 1952)


Presley v. Georgia, 558 U.S. 209 (decided January 19, 2010): Sixth Amendment right to public trial includes access to jury selection

 
 
 

Recent Posts

See All
Today in Supreme Court History: February 4

Dice v. Akron, Canton & Youngstown R.R. Co. , 342 U.S. 359 (decided February 4, 1952): release of personal injury defendant sued under Federal Employers’ Liability Act is determined by federal, not st

 
 
 
Today in Supreme Court History: February 3

Germany v. Philipp , 592 U.S. 169 (decided February 3, 2021): Foreign Sovereignty Immunities Act barred suit in U.S. courts by Holocaust survivors to recover value of property they were forced to sell

 
 
 
Today in Supreme Court History: February 2

Dartmouth College v. Woodward , 17 U.S. 518 (decided February 2, 1819): state attempt to change existing charter of college to turn it into a public institution violated Contracts Clause; corporate en

 
 
 

Comments


Thanks for submitting!

bottom of page