Today in Supreme Court History: March 1

Strauder v. West Virginia, 100 U.S. 303 (decided March 1, 1880): Fourteenth Amendment violated by state statute restricting jury duty to whites; the Court’s dictum as to some restrictions being permissible was overruled by Taylor v. Louisiana, 1975, insofar as restricting it to males

Swint v. Chambers Co. Comm’n, 514 U.S. 35 (decided March 1, 1995): The Court here takes on the persistent issue of discretionary “pendent appellate jurisdiction”, i.e., appealing a normally non-appealable order along with an appealable one.  In a §1983 suit against police officers and county arising from a narcotics raid on a nightclub, it holds that officers’ appeal from an order denying them qualified immunity (automatically appealable under 28 U.S.C. §1291, despite not being a final judgment) does not bring along with it county’s appeal from order denying summary judgment.  The claim against the county involved different issues (e.g., formation of policy), and the Circuit Court had no discretion to hear it.  (By contrast, see National Fire Ins. v. Bartolazo, 27 F.3d 518, where in an insurance coverage dispute the court heard the appeal of the denial of plaintiff’s summary judgment motion -- a nonfinal order -- along with the appeal of granting of defendant’s; the issues and evidence were the same and summary judgment to defendant had disposed of the entire case anyway.)

Marks v. United States, 430 U.S. 188 (decided March 1, 1977): new definition of impermissible “obscenity” announced in Miller v. California, 1973, did not apply to pending prosecutions (Court also makes the useful point that when it issues a plurality decision, its “holding” for precedential purposes will be the opinion of the judge(s) who concurred on the narrowest ground)

Freedman v. Maryland, 380 U.S. 51 (decided March 1, 1965): another obscenity case: can’t show a banned movie until you get a judge to overrule the censor’s order (though conviction vacated anyway because state statute didn’t provide for prompt judicial review)

Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (decided March 1, 2005): Eighth Amendment prohibits executing those under 18 when crime committed (overruling Stanford v. Kentucky, 1989)

FTC v. Sperry and Hutchinson Co., 405 U.S. 233 (decided March 1, 1972): Remember S&H green stamps?  I do, though my mother never spent time pasting them into those redeemable booklets (she was too busy raising six kids).  The FTC ordered S&H to cease a marketing scheme that supposedly unfairly inhibited competition.  Court holds that though the FTC can enjoin practices that violate neither the letter nor the spirit of anticompetition statutes, in this case its order made no findings and gave no reasons.  (From the opinion we learn that since 1896 S&H had issued more than a trillion stamps.)

The Mary Ann, 21 U.S. 380 (decided March 1, 1823): captain of slave ship screwed up the paperwork (slaves have to be listed in duplicate!) but Marshall vacates forfeiture because the indictment was also screwed up for lack of specifics; sends it back for correction

Lockhart v. United States, 577 U.S. 347 (decided March 1, 2016): child pornography statute increasing sentence if prior “aggravated sexual abuse, sexual abuse, or abusive sexual conduct involving a minor or ward” (emphasis added) included prior conviction of abuse of adult

FCC v. AT&T, Inc., 562 U.S. 397 (decided March 1, 2011): corporations don’t have “personal privacy” rights so as to resist Freedom of Information Act requests (FCC had granted FOIA request for records AT&T had provided to law enforcement in investigation of overcharging government) though they can assert the “trade secrets” privilege

Arizona v. Evans, 514 U.S. 1 (decided March 1, 1995): marijuana seized as result of arrest warrant that had already been quashed held admissible; “good faith” exception to exclusionary rule because due to clerical error police hadn’t been told of the quash (the warrant, issued by a town judge because defendant hadn’t shown for a hearing as to traffic violations, was quashed by another judge when he did show several days later, apparently by clerk notating in ledger without telling defendant or police)