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 drugs returned 66 results.

1000 BOLGER V. YOUNGS DRUGS PRODS. CORP.
[Concurrence]
1000 BOLGER V. YOUNGS DRUGS PRODS. CORP.
[Opinion]
1000 BOLGER V. YOUNGS DRUGS PRODS. CORP.
[Syllabus]
1000 BOLGER V. YOUNGS DRUGS PRODS. CORP.
[Concurrence]
1000 THOMPSON V. WESTERN STATES MEDICAL CENTER
[Syllabus]
The prohibitions on soliciting prescriptions for, and advertising, compounded drugs that are set forth in the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 amount to unconstitutional restrictions on commercial speech violative of the First Amendment.
716 WATSON V. UNITED STATES
[Syllabus]
671 SELL V. UNITED STATES
[Syllabus]
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in rejecting petitioner's argument that allowing the government to administer antipsychotic medication against his will solely to render him competent to stand trial for non-violent offenses would violate his rights under the First Fifth, and Sixth Amendments.
671 UNITED STATES V. OAKLAND CANNABISBUYERS’ COOPERATIVE
[Syllabus]
There is no medical necessity exception to the Controlled Substances Act's prohibitions on manufacturing and distributing marijuana.
671
[Syllabus]
671 BAZE V. REES
[Syllabus]
619 ELI LILLY & CO. V. MEDTRONIC, INC., 496 U.S. 661 (1990)
[Syllabus]
553 BOARD OF ED. OF INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST.NO. 92 OF POTTAWATOMIE CTY. V. EARLS
[Syllabus]
Petitioner school district's drug testing policy for students participating in extracurricular activities is a reasonable means of furthering the district's important interest in preventing and deterring drug use among its schoolchildren and does not violate the Fourth Amendment.
553 MERCK KGAA V. INTEGRA LIFESCIENCES I, LTD.
[Syllabus]
553 UNITED STATES V. JIMENEZ RECIO
[Syllabus]
A conspiracy does not automatically terminate simply because the Government has defeated its object.
477 ASTRA USA, INC. V.SANTA CLARA COUNTY
[Syllabus]
477 PLIVA, INC. V. MENSING
[Syllabus]
477 BAILEY V. UNITED STATES, 516 U.S. 137 (1996).
[Syllabus]
477 GONZALES V. OREGON
[Syllabus]
477 SORRELL V. IMS HEALTH INC.
[Syllabus]
477 EDWARDS V. UNITED STATES, 523 U.S. 511 (1998)
[Syllabus]
377 GALL V. UNITED STATES
[Syllabus]
377 PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH AND MFRS. OFAMERICA V. WALSH
[Syllabus]
1. Whether the federal Medicaid statue, 42 U. S. C. 1396 et seq., allows a state to use authority under that statute to compel drug manufacturers to subsidize price discounts on prescription drugs for non-Medicaid populations? 2. Whether a state may circumvent the Commerce Clause prohibition against regulating or taxing wholly out of state transactions by requiring an out-of-state manufacturer, which sells it products to wholesalers outside the state, to pay the state each time one of its products is subsequently sold by a retailer within the state?
377
[Syllabus]
377 BOUSLEY V. UNITED STATES, 523 U.S. 614 (1998)
[Syllabus]
377
[Syllabus]
377
[Syllabus]
377 VERNONIA SCH. DIST. 47J V. ACTON, 515 U.S. 646 (1995).
[Syllabus]
377 EASTERN ASSOCIATED COAL CORP. V. MINE WORKERS
[Syllabus]
1. Whether, as the First, Third, Fifth, Eighth, and Eleventh Circuits have held, there is a well defined and dominant public policy that prohibits enforcement of arbitration awards requiring reinstatement to safety sensitive positions of employees who test positive for illegal drugs, or whether, as the Second, Ninth, Tenth, and now Fourth Circuits have held, no such policy exists and courts must therefore uphold reinstatement to safety sensitive positions of those who test positive for illegal drugs. 2. Whether, as the Fourth, Ninth, and District of Columbia have held, an arbitration award should be vacated on public policy grounds only when the award itself violates positive law or requires unlawful conduct by the employer, or whether, as the First, Third, Fifth, Seventh, Eighth, and Eleventh Circuits have held, such an award need not violate positive law to violate public policy---a question on which the Court granted certiorari, but did not reach, in United Paperwork's International Union v. Misco, Inc., 484 U.S. 29 (1987)."
377 FERGUSON V. CHARLESTON
[Syllabus]
A state hospital's performance of drug tests to obtain evidence of maternity patients' cocaine use for law enforcement purposes is an unreasonable search if the patients have not consented to the procedure; the interest in using the threat of criminal sanctions to deter such use cannot justify a departure from the general rule that an official nonconsensual search is unconstitutional if not authorized by a valid warrant.
377 RICHARDS V. WISCONSIN, 520 U.S. 385 (1997).
[Syllabus]
377
[Syllabus]
377 NASA V. NELSON
[Syllabus]
377 ILLINOIS V. MCARTHUR
[Syllabus]
Whether it is constitutionally reasonable for police officers to secure a residence from the outside, and prohibit the occupant's entry into that residence for a short time while they obtain a search warrant based on probable cause, when this Court has suggested that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment in Segura v. United States 468 U.S. 796, 82 L.Ed.2d 599, 104 S.Ct. 3380 (1984) and other courts have found similar behavior consistent with the Fourth Amendment, and Segura."
377 MARYLAND V. PRINGLE
[Syllabus]
Where drugs and a roll of cash are found in the passenger compartment of a car with multiple occupants, and all deny ownership, does the Fourth Amendment prohibit a police officer form arresting the occupants of the car?
377
[Syllabus]
377 SAFFORD UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST. #1 V. REDDING
[Syllabus]
377
[Syllabus]
377 MUSCARELLO V. UNITED STATES, 524 U.S. 125 (1998)
[Syllabus]
377 WITTE V. UNITED STATES, 515 U.S. 389 (1995).
[Syllabus]
377 UNITED STATES V. BANKS
[Syllabus]
Whether law enforcement officers executing a warrant to search for illegal drugs violated the Fourth Amendment and 18 U.S.C. 3109, thereby requiring suppression of evidence, when they forcibly entered a small apartment in the middle of the afternoon 15-20 seconds after knocking and announcing their presence.
377 UNITED STATES V. SCHEFFER, 523 U.S. 303 (1998)
[Syllabus]
238 WYOMING V. HOUGHTON
[Syllabus]
238 BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF LELAND STANFORD JUNIORUNIV. V.ROCHE MOLECULAR SYSTEMS, INC.
[Syllabus]
238 VACCO, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW YORK V. QUILL, 117 S.CT. 2293, 138 L.ED.2D (1997)
[Syllabus]
238 BURGESS V. UNITED STATES
[Syllabus]
238
[Syllabus]
238
[Syllabus]
238 UNITED STATES V. DRAYTON
[Syllabus]
The Fourth Amendment does not require police officers to advise bus passengers of their right not to cooperate and to refuse consent to searches.
238 UNITED STATES V. FLORES-MONTANO
[Syllabus]
Whether, under the 4th Amendment, customs officers at the international border must have reasonable suspicion in order to remove, disassemble, and search a vehicle's gas tank for contraband?
238 CONE V. BELL
[Syllabus]
238 HERRING V. UNITED STATES
[Syllabus]
238 MINNESOTA V. CARTER, 525 U.S. 83 (1998)
[Syllabus]
238 GONZALES V. RAICH
[Syllabus]
238 UNITED STATES V. DOMINGUEZ BENITEZ
[Syllabus]
Whether, in order to show that a violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 constitutes reversible plain error, a defendant must demonstrate that he would not have pleaded guilty if the violation had not occurred?
238 WYETH V. LEVINE
[Syllabus]
238
[Syllabus]
238 FDA V. BROWN & WILLIAMSON TOBACCO CORP.
[Syllabus]
Whether, given FDA's findings, tobacco products are subject to regulation under the Act as ""drugs"" and ""devices.
238
[Syllabus]
238
[Syllabus]
238 BOND V. UNITED STATES
[Syllabus]
1. Whether a search occurs when a law enforcement officer manipulates a bus passenger's personal carry-on luggage to determine its contents."
238 OHIO V. ROBINETTE, 519 U.S. 33 (1996)
[Syllabus]
238 THORNTON V. UNITED STATES
[Syllabus]
Whether New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454 (1981), which established a bright-line rule authorizing a search of a car's passenger compartment incident to a contemporaneous lawful arrest of an occupant therein, also authorizes a warrantless search of a car when the arrestee was not in the car when the police initiated contact with him or within reaching distance of the car at the time of the arrest?
238 ILLINOIS V. RODRIGUEZ, 497 U.S. 177 (1990)
[Syllabus]
238 ABUELHAWA V. UNITED STATES
[Syllabus]
238 KENTUCKY V. KING
[Syllabus]
238
[Syllabus]
238
[Syllabus]
238 INDIANAPOLIS  V.  EDMOND
[Syllabus]
Whether checkpoints at which law enforcement officers briefly stop vehicular traffic, check motorists' licenses and vehicle registrations, look for signs of impairment, and walk a ""narcotics detection"" dog around the exterior of each stopped automobile are unlawful under the Fourth Amendment."
238 PEPPER V. UNITED STATES
[Syllabus]
238 PEARSON V. CALLAHAN
[Syllabus]