Search the opinions of the US Supreme Court
use and, or, not -- and is default
* acts as wildcard, phrases in "double quotes"
* acts as wildcard, phrases in "double quotes"
Find lawyers in the LII Lawyer Directory
Your query scientific returned 26 results.
![]() |
STONERIDGE INVESTMENT PARTNERS, LLC V.SCIENTIFIC-ATLANTA, INC. [Syllabus] |
![]() |
KUMHO TIRE CO. V. CARMICHAEL [Syllabus] |
![]() |
[Syllabus] |
![]() |
STONERIDGE INVESTMENT PARTNERS, LLC V.SCIENTIFIC-ATLANTA, INC. [Syllabus] |
![]() |
MASSACHUSETTS V. EPA [Syllabus] |
![]() |
GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. V. JOINER, 522 U.S. 136 (1997) [Syllabus] |
![]() |
BRAGDON V. ABBOTT, 524 U.S. 624 (1998) [Syllabus] |
![]() |
BULLCOMING V. NEW MEXICO [Syllabus] |
![]() |
GONZALES V. CARHART [Syllabus] |
![]() |
DV. UNITED STATES [Syllabus] |
![]() |
DENVER AREA EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS CONSORTIUM, INC,., ET AL. V. F.C.C., 518 U.S. 727 (1996) [Syllabus] |
![]() |
ASHCROFT V. FREE SPEECH COALITION [Syllabus] Provisions of the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 prohibiting "any visual depiction" that "is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct," as well as any sexually explicit image "advertised, promoted, presented, described, or distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression" it depicts a minor engaging in such conduct, are overbroad and therefore violate the First Amendment. |
![]() |
RENO V. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, 117 S.CT. 2329, 138 L.ED.2D 874 (1997) [Syllabus] |
![]() |
TUAN ANH NGUYEN V. INS [Syllabus] Title 8 U. S. C. §1409, which provides different citizenship rules for children born abroad and out of wedlock to one United States citizen and one noncitizen depending on whether the citizen parent is the mother or the father, is consistent with the equal protection guarantee embedded in the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. |
![]() |
WINTER V. NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSECOUNCIL, INC. [Syllabus] |
![]() |
MELENDEZ-DIAZ V. MASSACHUSETTS [Syllabus] |
![]() |
KSR INTL CO. V. TELEFLEX INC. [Syllabus] |
![]() |
JANUS CAPITAL GROUP, INC. V. FIRST DERIVATIVE TRADERS [Syllabus] |
![]() |
UNITED STATES V. SCHEFFER, 523 U.S. 303 (1998) [Syllabus] |
![]() |
UNITED STATES V. STEVENS [Syllabus] |
![]() |
GONZALES V. OREGON [Syllabus] |
![]() |
BAZE V. REES [Syllabus] |
![]() |
MATRIXX INITIATIVES, INC. V. SIRACUSANO [Syllabus] |
![]() |
ILLINOIS V. WARDLOW [Syllabus] Whether a person's sudden and unprovoked flight from a clearly identifiable police officer, who is patrolling a high crime area, is sufficiently suspicious to justify a temporary investigator stop pursuant to Terry v. Ohio. |
![]() |
AUCIELLO IRON WORKS, INC. V. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BD., 517 U.S. 781 (1996) [Syllabus] |
![]() |
AMERICAN ELEC. POWER CO. V. CONNECTICUT [Syllabus] |
![]() |
CIPOLLONE V. LIGGETT GROUP, 505 U.S. 504 (1992). [Syllabus] |










