skip navigation
search

Search the opinions of the US Supreme Court

Search for:
All decisions
Only decisions since 1991
Only summaries of decisions
Only historic decisions
use and, or, not -- and is default
* acts as wildcard, phrases in "double quotes"

Your query contribution returned 38 results.

1000 RANDALL V. SORRELL
[Syllabus]
947 COOPER INDUSTRIES, INC. V. AVIALL SERVICES, INC.
[Syllabus]
825 MCCONNELL V. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMíN
[Syllabus]
766 NIXON V. SHRINK MISSOURI GOVERNMENT PAC
[Syllabus]
Whether the court of appeals erred in declaring that Missouri's campaign contribution limits for statewide office, which exceed the limits expressly approved by this Court for national elections in Buckeley V. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976), violates the First Amendment.
723 NEW YORK TIMES CO. V. TASINI
[Syllabus]
Where freelance authors' articles in print periodicals were republished in electronic databases without the authors' consent, the copying was not authorized by the reproduction privilege afforded collective works publishers under §201(c) of the Copyright Act.
696
[Syllabus]
696 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMíN V. COLORADOREPUBLICAN FEDERAL CAMPAIGN COMM.
[Syllabus]
Because a political party's expenditures coordinated with its candidates, unlike the party's truly independent expenditures, may be restricted to minimize circumvention of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971's contribution limits, the Colorado Republican Party's facial challenge to the Acts limits on parties' coordinated expenditures is rejected.
670
[Syllabus]
638 UNITED STATES V. ATLANTIC RESEARCH CORP.
[Syllabus]
565 COLORADO REPUBLICAN FEDERAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE V. FEDERAL ELECTION COM'N, 518 U.S. 604 (1996)
[Syllabus]
521 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMíN V. BEAUMONT
[Syllabus]
The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, 2 U.S.C. 441b, prohibits corporations and labor unions from making direct campaign contributions and independent expenditures in connection with federal elections. The question presented is whether Section 441b's prohibition on contributions violates the First Amendment to the Constitution if it is applied to a nonprofit corporation whose primary purpose is to engage in political advocacy.
521 ARIZONA FREE ENTERPRISE CLUBS FREEDOMCLUB PAC V.BENNETT
[Syllabus]
466 DAVIS V. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMN
[Syllabus]
402 LV. DEWOLFF, BOBERG & ASSOCIATES, INC.
[Syllabus]
317 HUGHES AIRCRAFT CO. V. JACOBSON
[Syllabus]
317 CHANDRIS, INC. V. LATSIS, 515 U.S. 347 (1995).
[Syllabus]
317 UNITED STATES V. CLEVELAND INDIANSBASEBALL CO.
[Syllabus]
Back wages are subject to FICA and FUTA taxes by reference to the year the wages are in fact paid.
317
[Syllabus]
317
[Syllabus]
201 LOCKE V. KARASS
[Syllabus]
201 BARNHART V. PEABODY COAL CO.
[Syllabus]
Although the Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992 provides that the Commissioner of Social Security "shall, before October 1, 1993," assign each coal industry retiree eligible for benefits to an extant operator or related entity, initial assignments made after that date are valid despite their untimeliness.
201
[Syllabus]
201 CIGNA CORP. V. AMARA
[Syllabus]
201 CITIZENS UNITED V. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMN
[Syllabus]
201
[Syllabus]
201 CAPERTON V. A.†T. MASSEY COAL CO.
[Syllabus]
201
[Syllabus]
201 PEARSON V. CALLAHAN
[Syllabus]
201
[Syllabus]
201 NORFOLK & WESTERN R. CO. V. AYERS
[Syllabus]
Mental anguish damages resulting from the fear of developing cancer may be recovered under the Federal Employers' Liability Act by a railroad worker suffering from the actionable injury asbestosis caused by work-related exposure to asbestos; the FELA's express terms, reinforced by consistent judicial applications of the Act, allow such a worker to recover his entire damages from a railroad whose negligence jointly caused his injury, thus placing on the railroad the burden of seeking contribution from other potential tortfeasors.
201 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMN V. WISCONSIN RIGHT TOLIFE, INC.
[Syllabus]
201 UNITED STATES V. FIOR DíITALIA, INC.
[Syllabus]
In assessing a restaurant for Federal Insurance Contribution Act taxes based upon tips that its employees may have received but did not report, the Internal Revenue Service is authorized to use an aggregate estimate of all tips that the restaurant's customers paid its employees.
201 GRATZ V. BOLLINGER
[Syllabus]
1. Does the University of Michigan's use of racial preferences in undergraduate admissions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C.2000d), or 42 U.S.C. 1981?
201
[Syllabus]
201 BANK OF AMERICA NAT. TRUST AND SAV. ASSN. V.203 NORTH LASALLE STREET PARTNERSHIP
[Syllabus]
201 AMERICAN ELEC. POWER CO. V. CONNECTICUT
[Syllabus]
201 561 U.†S. ____ (2010)
[Syllabus]
201 UNITED STATES V. REOGANIZED CF&I FABRICATORS OF UTAH, INC., ET AL., 518 U.S. 213 (1996)
[Syllabus]