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 injunction returned 136 results.

Your search has returned a large number of results. You might want to consider using additional terms to narrow it.

1000 WINTER V. NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSECOUNCIL, INC.
[Syllabus]
971 SALAZAR V. BUONO
[Syllabus]
955
[Syllabus]
884 SCHENCK V. PRO CHOICE NETWORK, 519 U.S. 357 (1997).
[Syllabus]
862 SOLE V. WYNER
[Syllabus]
840 SMITH V. BAYER CORP.
[Syllabus]
817 GRUPO MEXICANO DE DESARROLLO, S. A. V. ALLIANCE BOND FUND, INC.
[Syllabus]
792 MONSANTO CO. V. GEERTSON SEED FARMS
[Syllabus]
792 MUNAF V.GEREN
[Syllabus]
792 ASHCROFT V. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
[Syllabus]
Whether the Child Online Protection Act violates the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution?
763 BAKER BY THOMAS V. GENERAL MOTORS CORP., 522 U.S. 222 (1998)
[Syllabus]
699 TORY V. COCHRAN
[Syllabus]
699
[Syllabus]
699 LEWIS V. LEWIS & CLARK MARINE, INC.
[Syllabus]
1. Does the district court abuse its discretion by dissolving the injuction against state court proceeding in a single claimant limitation of liability case (46 U.S.C. 181, et seq.) when the claimant guarantees the vessel owner's right to limitation by stipulating that the claim does not exceed the limitation fund; and 2. If so, must the injunction nonetheless be dissolved pursuant to the Saving To Suitors clause of 28 U.S.C. 1333(2)?"
661
[Syllabus]
619 HORNE V.FLORES
[Syllabus]
619 CELOTEX CORP. V. EDWARDS, 514 U.S. 300 (1995).
[Syllabus]
571 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?
571 AGOSTINI V. FELTON, 117 S.CT. 1997, 138 L.ED.2D 391 (1997).
[Syllabus]
571 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.
511 LEWIS V. CASEY, 516 U.S. 804 (1996)
[Syllabus]
511 BRANCH V. SMITH
[Syllabus]
The Federal District Court properly enjoined a Mississippi state court's proposed congressional redistricting plan and fashioned its own plan under 2 U. S. C. §2c.
511 MCCREARY COUNTY V. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIESUNION OF KY.
[Syllabus]
440 NELSON V. CAMPBELL
[Syllabus]
Whether a complaint brought under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 by a death-sentenced state prisoner, who seeks to stay his execution in order to pursue a challenge to the procedures for carrying out the execution, is properly recharacterized as a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254?
440 LOPEZ V. MONTEREY COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, 519 U.S. 9 (1996)
[Syllabus]
440 MILLER V. FRENCH
[Syllabus]
The question presented is whether Section 3626(e) violates separation-of-powers principles by legislatively specifying a rule of decision or legislatively annulling a judgment."
440 SCHEIDLER V. NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FORWOMEN, INC.
[Syllabus]
Because all of the predicate acts supporting the jury's finding of a violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act must be reversed, the Seventh Circuit's decision that petitioner protesters' activities at abortion clinics violated RICO must also be reversed.
440 BROWN V. PLATA
[Syllabus]
440 JEFFERSON COUNTY V. ACKER
[Syllabus]
440 MEGHRIG ET AL. V. KFC WESTERN, INC., 516 U.S. 479 (1996).
[Syllabus]
440 TRAVELERS INDEMNITY CO. V. BAILEY
[Syllabus]
440 ARIZONA CHRISTIAN SCHOOL TUITION ORGANIZATION V.WINN
[Syllabus]
440 ICC V. TRANSCON LINES, 513 U.S. 138 (1995).
[Syllabus]
440 ARKANSAS V. FARM CREDIT SERVICES OF CENTRAL ARKANSAS, 520 U.S. 821 (1997)
[Syllabus]
348
[Syllabus]
348 RENO V. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, 117 S.CT. 2329, 138 L.ED.2D 874 (1997)
[Syllabus]
348 MEDIMMUNE, INC. V. GENENTECH, INC.
[Syllabus]
348 CUYAHOGA FALLS V. BUCKEYE COMMUNITYHOPE FOUNDATION
[Syllabus]
Respondents have presented no genuine issues of material fact with regard to whether Cuyahoga Falls violated the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses by submitting to voters a facially neutral referendum petition calling for the repeal of a municipal ordinance authorizing construction of a low-income housing complex.
348 HIBBS V. WINN
[Syllabus]
348 CUOMO V. CLEARING HOUSE ASSN., L. L. C.
[Syllabus]
348 GRANITE ROCK CO. V. TEAMSTERS
[Syllabus]
348 SAENZ V. ROE
[Syllabus]
348
[Syllabus]
348
[Syllabus]
348 NKEN V. HOLDER
[Syllabus]
348
[Syllabus]
348
[Syllabus]
348 NEW YORK STATE BD. OF ELECTIONS V.LOPEZ TORRES
[Syllabus]
348 BLESSING V. FREESTONE, 520 U.S. 329 (1997)
[Syllabus]
348 ASHCROFT V. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
[Syllabus]
The Child Online Protection Act's reliance on "community standards" to identify what World Wide Web material "is harmful to minors" does not by itself render the statute substantially overbroad for First Amendment purposes.
348 AYOTTE V. PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF NORTHERNNEW ENG.
[Syllabus]
348 DAVIS V. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMN
[Syllabus]
348
[Syllabus]
348 DOE V. REED
[Syllabus]
348
[Syllabus]
220
[Syllabus]
220 PLEASANT GROVE CITY V. SUMMUM
[Syllabus]
220 PGA TOUR, INC. V. MARTIN
[Syllabus]
Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 prohibits petitioner from denying golfer Casey Martin equal access to its golf tours on the basis of a disability that prevents him from walking a golf course; allowing Martin to use a golf cart, despite petitioner's walking requirement, is not a modification that would "fundamentally alter the nature" of petitioner's tours.
220 VAN ORDEN V. PERRY
[Syllabus]
220 OHIO V. AKRON CENTER, 497 U.S. 502 (1990)
[Syllabus]
220
[Syllabus]
220 UNITED STATES V. WHITE MOUNTAINAPACHE TRIBE
[Syllabus]
Public Law 86-392 gives rise to Indian Tucker Act jurisdiction in the Court of Federal Claims over respondent Tribe's suit for money damages against the United States for breach of a fiduciary duty to manage Fort Apache land and improvements held in trust for the Tribe but occupied by the Government.
220 GRUTTER V. BOLLINGER
[Syllabus]
1. Does the University of Michigan Law School's use of racial preferences in student 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? 2. Should an appellate court required to apply strict scrutiny to governmental race-based preferences review de novo the district court's findings because the fact issues are constitutional?
220
[Syllabus]
220 STRATE V. A-1 CONTRACTORS, 520 U.S. 438 (1997).
[Syllabus]
220 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMN V. WISCONSIN RIGHT TOLIFE, INC.
[Syllabus]
220 LEVIN V. COMMERCE ENERGY, INC.
[Syllabus]
220 NEBRASKA V. WYOMING, 515 U.S. 1 (1995)
[Syllabus]
220 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?
220 HOWSAM V. DEAN WITTER REYNOLDS, INC.
[Syllabus]
A National Association of Securities Dealers arbitrator, rather than a court, should apply the NASD Code of Arbitration Procedure's time limit rule to a client's dispute with a broker.
220 MORSE V. REPUBLICAN PARTY OF VIRGINIA, 517 U.S. 186 (1996).
[Syllabus]
220 AMERICAN INS. ASSN. V. GARAMENDI
[Syllabus]
California's Holocaust Victim Insurance Relief Act (HVIRA) requires California insurers to provide extensive information regarding every insurance policy issued in Nazi dominated Europe between 1920 and 1945 by any insurer with which the California insurer now has a legal relationship. The district court enjoined enforcement of the Act on three constitutional grounds: interference with the federal government's power over foreign affairs, due process, and the Foreign Commerce Clause. Over the objections of the U.S. government and affected foreign governments, and in direct conflict with Gerling Global Reinsurance Corp. v. Gallagher, 267 F.3d 1228 (11th Cir. 2001), the Ninth Circuit reversed and upheld the HVIRA in all respects. 1. Whether the HVIRA, which the U.S. government has called an actual interference with U.S. foreign policy, and which affected foreign governments have protested as inconsistent with international agreements, violates the foreign affairs doctrine of Zschering v. Miller, 389 U.S. 429 (1968). 2. Whether the HVIRA, which attempts to regulate insurance transactions that occurred overseas between foreign parties more than half a century ago, exceeds California's legislative jurisdiction under the Due Process Clause. 3. Whether the McCarran-Ferguson Act, 15 U.S.C. 1011-1015, insulates the HVIRA form review under the Foreign Commerce Clause.
220 VIRGINIA OFFICE FOR PROTECTION AND ADVOCACYV. STEWART
[Syllabus]
220
[Syllabus]
220
[Syllabus]
220
[Syllabus]
220 GREAT-WEST LIFE & ANNUITY INS. CO. V. KNUDSON
[Syllabus]
Because petitioners are seeking legal relief-the imposition of personal liability on respondents for a contractual obligation to pay money-this action is not authorized by §502(a)(3) of ERISA, which prescribes a suit for "appropriate equitable relief."
220 SELING V. YOUNG
[Syllabus]
In Kansas v. Hendricks, 521 U.S. 346 (1997), this Court held that the Kansas law authorizing commitment of sexually violent predators is civil in nature and does not violate the double jeopardy or ex post facto clauses. The Kansas law was modeled on Washington's Sexually Violent Predator Statute: Whether an otherwise valid civil statute can be divested of its civil nature and held to violate the double jeopardy and ex post facto clauses because the administrative agency operating the commitment facility fails to provide for treatment and other conditions of confinement mandated by statute at some time during the individual's commitment."
220 CAPITOL SQUARE REVIEW BD. V. PINETTE, 515 U.S. 753 (1995).
[Syllabus]
220 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."
220 WAL-MART STORES, INC. V. DUKES
[Syllabus]
220 GONZALES V. RAICH
[Syllabus]
220 CALDERON V. ASHMUS, 523 U.S. 740 (1998)
[Syllabus]
220 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBANDEVELOPMENT V. RUCKER
[Syllabus]
Title 42 U. S. C. §1437d(l)(6)'s plain language unambiguously requires public housing lease terms that give local authorities the discretion to terminate the lease of a tenant when a member of the tenant's household or a guest engages in drug-related activity, regardless of whether the tenant knew, or should have known, of that activity.
220
[Syllabus]
220
[Syllabus]
220
[Syllabus]
220 BRAY V. ALEXANDRIA WOMEN'S HEALTH CLINIC, 113 S. CT. 753 (1993).
[Syllabus]
220 EASTERN ENTERPRISES V. APFEL, 524 U.S. 498 (1998)
[Syllabus]
220 ERIE V. PAPS A. M.
[Syllabus]
Did the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, the court of last resort of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, improperly strike an ordinance of the City of Erie which fully comports with the principles articulated in Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc., thereby willfully disregarding binding precedent in violation of the Supremacy Clause at Article VI, Clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States?
220
[Syllabus]
220 FRIENDS OF EARTH, INC. V. LAIDLAW ENVI-RONMENTAL SERVICES (TOC), INC.
[Syllabus]
1. Whether a citizen suit seeking civil penalties under Section 505 of the Clean Water Act is constitutionally moot under Steel Co. V. Citizens for Better Environment, 118 S. Ct. 1003 (1998), due to lack of redressability, where plaintiffs had standing at the time of the complaint and have shown continuing injury-in-fact but have not obtained injunctive relief. 2. Whether a citizen suit seeking civil penalties under Section 505 of the Clean Water Act is constitutionally moot under Steel Co., due to lack of redressability, when the district court has rendered a declaratory judgment as to liability and the issue of liability was contested. 3. Whether plaintiffs could not be awarded attorneys' fees or litigation costs not be awarded attorneys' fees or litigation costs because the case was dismissed for mootness, even if the litigation was responsible for bringing the defendant into compliance with the Clean Water Act.
220 FREE ENTERPRISE FUND V. PUBLIC COMPANYACCOUNTING OVERSIGHT BD.
[Syllabus]
220
[Syllabus]
220 ROMER, GOVERNOR OF COLORADO, ET AL. V. EVANS ET AL., 517 U.S. 620 (1996).
[Syllabus]
220
[Syllabus]
220
[Syllabus]
220 METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER STUDIOS INC. V.GROKSTER, LTD.
[Syllabus]
220
[Syllabus]
220 MINNESOTA V. MILLE LACS BAND OF CHIPPEWAINDIANS
[Syllabus]
220 LOS ANGELES COUNTY V. HUMPHRIES
[Syllabus]
220 EDWARDS V. BALISOK, 520 U.S. 641 (1997).
[Syllabus]
220 CITIZENS UNITED V. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMN
[Syllabus]
220 CHENEY V. UNITED STATES DIST. COURT FOR D. C.
[Syllabus]
(1) Whether the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. 1, §§ 1 et seq., can be construed, consistent with the Constitution, principles of separation of powers, and this Court's decisions governing judicial review of Executive Branch actions, to authorize broad discovery of the process by which the Vice President and other senior advisors gathered information to advise the President on important national policy matters, based solely on an unsupported allegation in a complaint that the advisory group was not constituted as the President expressly directed and the advisory group itself reported? (2) Whether the court of appeals had mandamus or appellate jurisdiction to review the district court's unprecedented discovery orders in this litigation?
220 IDAHO V. COEUR D'ALENE TRIBE OF IDAHO, 117 S.CT. 2028, 138 L.ED.2D 438 (1997).
[Syllabus]
220
[Syllabus]
220 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.
220
[Syllabus]
220 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE V. UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 525 U.S. 316 (1999)
[Syllabus]
220 LINGLE V. CHEVRON U.S.A. INC.
[Syllabus]
220 HUNT V. CROMARTIE
[Syllabus]
220
[Syllabus]
220
[Syllabus]
220 LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION V. VELAZQUEZ
[Syllabus]
Whether the court of appeals erred in refusing to follow this Court's decision in Rust V. Sullivan, 500 U.S. 173 (1990) when it invalidated a limitation imposed by congress on the services that may be provided by legal Services Corporation grantees and held that Congress must subsidize grantees involved in litigation that seeks to amend or otherwise challenges existing welfare laws."
220 UTAH V. EVANS
[Syllabus]
The Census Bureau's use of "hot-deck imputation" to fill in gaps in census information and resolve conflicts in the data does not violate 13 U. S. C. §195, which forbids use of "the statistical method known as 'sampling' " in determining population for purposes of apportioning congressional Representatives, and is not inconsistent with the Constitution's Census Clause, which requires an "actual Enumeration" of each State's population.
220 HAWAII V. OFFICE OF HAWAIIAN AFFAIRS
[Syllabus]
220 HOLMES GROUP, INC. V. VORNADO AIRCIRCULATION SYSTEMS, INC.
[Syllabus]
The Federal Circuit cannot assert jurisdiction over a case in which the complaint does not allege a claim arising under federal patent law, but the answer contains a patent-law counterclaim.
220 REPUBLICAN PARTY OF MINN. V. WHITE
[Syllabus]
The Minnesota Supreme Court's canon of judicial conduct prohibiting candidates for judicial election from announcing their views on disputed legal and political issues violates the First Amendment.
220
[Syllabus]
220 RILEY V. KENNEDY
[Syllabus]
220 NASA V. NELSON
[Syllabus]
220
[Syllabus]
220 WILKINSON V. DOTSON
[Syllabus]
220 GONZALES V. CARHART
[Syllabus]
220 CHANDLER V. MILLER, 520 U.S. 305 (1997)
[Syllabus]
220 MACS SHELL SERVICE, INC. V.SHELL OILPRODUCTS CO.
[Syllabus]
220
[Syllabus]
220 SUMMERS V. EARTH ISLAND INSTITUTE
[Syllabus]
220 EL PASO NATURAL GAS CO. V. NEZTSOSIE
[Syllabus]
220 WARNER JENKINSON CO., INC. V. HILTON DAVIS CHEMICAL CO., 520 U.S. 17 (1997).
[Syllabus]
220 VERIZON MD. INC. V. PUBLIC SERV. COMMN OF MD.
[Syllabus]
Title 28 U. S. C. §1331 provides a basis for federal-court jurisdiction over a telecommunication carrier's claim that a state public utility commission's order requiring reciprocal compensation for telephone calls to Internet service providers is pre-empted by federal law; the doctrine of Ex parte Young, 209 U. S. 123, permits the suit to go forward against the state commissioners in their official capacities.
220 RENO V. BOSSIER PARISH SCHOOL BOARD, 520 U.S. 471 (1997).
[Syllabus]
220 CLINTON V. GOLDSMITH
[Syllabus]
220 LOCKE V. DAVEY
[Syllabus]
The Washington Constitution provides that no public money shall be appropriated or applied to religious instruction. Following this constitutional command, Washington does not grant college scholarships to otherwise eligible students who are pursuing a degree in theology. Does the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment require the state to fund religious instruction, if it provides college scholarships for secular instruction?
220 SKINNER V. SWITZER
[Syllabus]
220 ARIZONA FREE ENTERPRISE CLUBS FREEDOMCLUB PAC V.BENNETT
[Syllabus]