Today in Supreme Court History: June 13

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (decided June 13, 1966): asking questions of detained witness without advising of right to remain silent violates Fifth Amendment guarantee against self incrimination (Congress tried to abrogate this holding by statute in 1968, but statute was chipped away at and finally struck down, Dickerson v. United States, 2000) (Miranda was re-tried in Arizona court without the invalid confession and convicted; charge was rape/kidnapping, 104 Ariz. 174)

Romano v. Oklahoma, 512 U.S. 1 (decided June 13, 1994): jury can consider defendant’s previous death sentence (for a concomitant killing) in determining sentence for murder

ZF Automotive US v. Luxshare, Ltd., 596 U.S. 619 (decided June 13, 2022): overseas arbitration proceedings are not “foreign tribunals” for which discovery can be sought under 28 U.S.C. §1782

United States v. Bryant, 579 U.S. 140 (decided June 13, 2016): upholding 18 U.S.C. §117(a), requiring increased penalty for domestic violence on Native American Reservations if two previous convictions in Native American courts even if not represented by counsel; Sixth Amendment right to counsel does not apply in Native American courts for crimes with penalties of less than one year, 25 U.S.C. §1302(c)(2); procedures under Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968 are adequate

Kemp v. United States, 596 U.S. 528 (decided June 13, 2022): instead of appealing, defendant must get relief from final judgment under F.R.C.P. 60(b)(1) where court makes procedural mistake even though mistake not obvious (Eleventh Circuit had miscalculated time after drug conviction to seek cert, and defendant had missed the deadline for a 60(b)(1) motion) (in the Court’s historical review of postjudgment relief it creatively points out, “statutory language obviously transplanted from another legal source will often bring the old soil with it”)

Nyquist v. Mauclet, 432 U.S. 1 (decided June 13, 1977): denying college financial assistance to resident aliens violates Equal Protection

Puerto Rico v. Franklin California Tax-Free Trust, 579 U.S. 115 (decided June 13, 2016): Puerto Rico statute allowing public utilities to structure their debts preempted by federal Bankruptcy Code (Puerto Rico was undergoing a fiscal crisis and found it had been singled out in a mysterious change to the Bankruptcy Code which of course it had no voice in; see John Oliver’s segment on this, https:// youtu.be/Tt-mpuR_QHQ, starting at 9:00)

Montana v. Egelhoff, 518 U.S. 37 (decided June 13, 1996): Due Process not offended by state law barring defendant from arguing he was intoxicated as a defense to mental state required for crime (here, murder by gunshot wound) (his blood alcohol was 0.36% even hours after the incident! 0.5% will kill you)

Katzenbach v. Morgan, 384 U.S. 641 (decided June 13, 1966): Voting Rights Act requiring everyone with a sixth grade education to be allowed to vote superseded New York law requiring proficiency in English (this would have applied to my grandfather, who went up to sixth grade in Italy but was never functionally literate in English; he began as a groundskeeper in the Works Progress Administration under FDR but by the time I got to know him he always voted Republican)

Gojack v. United States, 384 U.S. 702 (decided June 13, 1966): contempt against person who spoke back to HUAC and didn’t answer questions reversed because HUAC was never formally authorized to investigate this area (“Communist Party activity in the field of labor”)

Vidal v. Elster, 602 U.S. 286 (decided June 13, 2024): First Amendment not violated by rule that trademark can’t include a person’s name without his consent (this was “Trump Too Small” thumb and forefinger close together making comment on his anatomy) (a correct decision, but my niece made the obvious observation, “If there’s anyone who fits the stereotype of a guy compensating for a small dick . . .”, actually not funny because it has real-world consequences)

FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, 602 U.S. 367 (decided June 13, 2024): anti-abortion doctors have no standing to contest relaxation of FDA rules making it easier for pro-choice doctors to prescribe abortion drug (mifepristone)