Supreme Court of the United States, 1979

Justice White wrote for a majority of six justices holding that a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act accrues when the plaintiff knows the injury and its cause, not when he learns of the defendant's negligence, and therefore reversed the Third Circuit.

The Supreme Court affirmed the Sixth Circuit’s judgment that the Columbus Board of Education intentionally maintained a systemwide segregated school system in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, and that a systemwide remedial plan was constitutionally required.

The Supreme Court held that the First and Fourteenth Amendments permit a State to resolve church property disputes under 'neutral principles of law'—examining deeds, corporate charters, state statutes, and church constitutions for trust language in purely secular terms—and do not compel civil courts to defer…

The Court held that a state prisoner challenging the constitutional sufficiency of the evidence in a federal habeas proceeding is entitled to relief when, viewing the evidence in the prosecution's favor, no rational trier of fact could have found every essential element beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Supreme Court affirmed the West Virginia Supreme Court, holding that the state statute criminalizing the publication of a juvenile offender’s name without court approval violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments because it impermissibly punishes the truthful, lawfully obtained dissemination of information of…

Justice Rehnquist delivered the opinion of the Court, holding that the respondent failed to establish a constitutional deprivation and therefore could not maintain a §1983 claim; the Court reversed the Fifth Circuit.

The Court, in an opinion delivered by Chief Justice Burger, held that an arrest made in good‑faith reliance on a municipal ordinance that is later declared unconstitutionally vague is nevertheless valid, and the search incident to that arrest is lawful, so the evidence obtained need not be suppressed.

The Supreme Court, per Chief Justice Burger, held that police detention of Brown for the purpose of demanding his identification was a seizure of his person subject to the Fourth Amendment, and that the seizure was unreasonable because the officers lacked any reasonable suspicion, based on objective facts, that he was…

The Court held that § 204(b) of the Social Security Act entitles beneficiaries who file written waiver requests to an opportunity for an oral hearing before their overpayments are recouped, while holding that neither the statute nor the Due Process Clause requires a prerecoupment hearing for mere reconsideration…

The Court, in an opinion delivered by Chief Justice Burger, affirmed the Third Circuit’s denial of a writ of mandamus and held that a Member of Congress may not obtain mandamus relief to challenge an indictment on Speech or Debate Clause grounds because direct appeal to the Court of Appeals is the proper avenue.

The Court held that the Speech or Debate Clause bars the Government from introducing evidence of a Member’s past legislative acts in a prosecution for accepting bribes, although promises to perform future legislative acts may be proved.

The Court held that a jury instruction stating that the law presumes a person intends the ordinary consequences of voluntary acts violated due process because a reasonable juror could interpret it as conclusively establishing intent or shifting the burden of persuasion on that element.

Justice Marshall delivered the opinion of the Court, holding that the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act's safety and effectiveness requirements apply to terminally ill cancer patients and that no statutory exemption exists for such patients.

The Supreme Court held that a former congressional deputy administrative assistant discharged because of her sex stated a cause of action directly under the equal protection component of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and that damages are an appropriate remedy, reversing the en banc Fifth Circuit's…

The Supreme Court reversed a three-judge District Court judgment declaring Massachusetts' absolute lifetime veterans' preference for classified civil service positions (ch. 31, § 23) unconstitutional as sex discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause. Applying Washington v.

The Supreme Court held that res judicata does not confine a bankruptcy court to the judgment and record of a prior state-court proceeding when a creditor seeks to establish that a debt previously reduced to judgment is nondischargeable under § 17 of the Bankruptcy Act.

The Court held that the federal courts could reach respondents' due process challenge to New York's automobile-firearm presumption on habeas corpus because no independent and adequate state procedural ground barred review; that respondents lacked standing to attack the statute on its face because the presumption, as…

The Supreme Court held that convicted prisoners have no constitutional or inherent right to conditional release before the expiration of a valid sentence, so the mere possibility of parole creates only a 'mere hope' rather than a protectible liberty interest; however, Nebraska's uniquely structured statute directing…

The Court held that conditions of pretrial detention violate due process only when they amount to punishment, rather than merely serving legitimate regulatory or institutional-management purposes.

The Supreme Court held that Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 implies a private right of action in favor of a woman denied admission to federally funded medical schools because of her sex, despite the statute's silence on remedies.

The Supreme Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause requires more than a preponderance of the evidence, but not proof beyond a reasonable doubt, to commit an individual involuntarily to a state mental hospital for an indefinite period; the constitutional minimum is an intermediate standard at least…

In a per curiam opinion, the Court held that the First Amendment does not require a public employer to consider grievances filed by a union on behalf of its members and reversed the Eighth Circuit's judgment.

The Court held that Oklahoma’s prohibition on exporting natural minnows for sale violated the Commerce Clause because it facially discriminated against interstate commerce and Oklahoma had not shown that nondiscriminatory conservation measures were unavailable.

The Supreme Court reversed the New York Court of Appeals, holding that § 111 of the New York Domestic Relations Law—which requires an unmarried mother's but not an unmarried father's consent to the adoption of a child born out of wedlock—violates the Equal Protection Clause because its invariable gender-based…

The Supreme Court affirmed the Georgia Supreme Court’s judgment, holding that Georgia’s statute denying wrongful‑death recovery to fathers of illegitimate children who have not legitimated the child does not violate the Equal Protection or Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The Supreme Court held that Miranda v. Arizona does not require an explicit statement of waiver before a statement made during custodial interrogation may be admitted: an express written or oral waiver is usually strong proof but is not inevitably necessary or sufficient, and waiver may be clearly inferred from the…

The Supreme Court held that standing under § 812 of the Fair Housing Act, like standing under § 810, extends as broadly as Article III of the Constitution permits, making the two provisions alternative remedies for the same class of plaintiffs and rejecting the Ninth Circuit's 'direct victims' limitation.

Justice White, writing for an 8‑justice majority, held that a random stop of an automobile to check the driver’s license and vehicle registration without articulable reasonable suspicion violates the Fourth Amendment. The Court affirmed the Delaware Supreme Court’s judgment.

The Supreme Court held that the controversy over Los Angeles County's 1972 plan to interview the top 544 scorers on an unvalidated written firefighter examination had become moot during the pendency of the litigation, because there was no reasonable expectation the County would again use an unvalidated examination for…

The Court affirmed an order permitting state officials to send welfare recipients an explanatory notice about available state procedures for seeking a determination of eligibility for past benefits.

The Supreme Court held that Alabama's alimony statutes, which allow alimony obligations to be imposed on husbands but never on wives, violate the Equal Protection Clause: reinforcing the dependent-wife model cannot justify the classification, and because Alabama courts already hold individualized hearings into the…

The Court upheld the Texas Optometry Board composition requirement of § 2.02 as a rationally related, constitutionally permissible classification, and reversed the district court’s decision striking down § 5.13(d), holding the trade‑name prohibition a valid regulation of commercial speech.

The Court held that state law, not a uniform federal equity rule, determines whether a mortgagee has a security interest in rents generated by mortgaged property during bankruptcy.

The Court upheld Texas's requirement that most members of the state optometry board belong to the recognized professional association, applying rational-basis review because the classification involved economic regulation and did not burden a fundamental right.

The Court held that Washington validly assumed jurisdiction over the Yakima Reservation through legislative action without first amending its constitutional disclaimer, and that Public Law 280 authorized Washington to exercise partial geographic and subject-matter jurisdiction.

The Supreme Court held that Missouri's automatic exemption permitting any woman to opt out of jury service violated the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of a petit jury drawn from a fair cross section of the community, because it systematically excluded women and produced Jackson County venires averaging less…

The Supreme Court held that a public schoolteacher does not forfeit First Amendment protection by voicing criticism privately to her principal rather than publicly, rejecting the Fifth Circuit's view that Pickering, Perry, and Mt.