Supreme Court of the United States, 1990

The Court held that ERISA preempts a Texas common-law wrongful-discharge claim alleging that an employer terminated an employee to avoid pension obligations. Section 514(a) expressly preempts the claim because liability depends on the existence of an ERISA plan and the employer’s pension-defeating motive.

Justice Scalia's majority opinion held that the National Wildlife Federation failed to establish its entitlement to judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act at summary judgment.

Justice O'Connor's opinion for the Court held that Arizona's narrowing construction of its especially heinous, cruel, or depraved aggravating circumstance was constitutionally sufficient under Walton v. Arizona. Federal habeas courts reviewing its application must use Jackson v.

Justice O'Connor's opinion held that admitting the child's statements to the pediatrician violated the Confrontation Clause and affirmed the Idaho Supreme Court's judgment reversing Wright's conviction.

The Court held that the First Amendment prohibition against political patronage dismissals extends to promotions, transfers, recalls after layoffs, and hiring when political affiliation is not an appropriate job requirement.

The Court held that retroactively applying a Texas statute permitting courts to remove an unauthorized fine from a jury verdict, rather than grant a new trial, did not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause.

The Court, in an opinion by Justice Scalia, held that a warrantless entry based on third-party consent satisfies the Fourth Amendment when officers reasonably believe the consenting person has common authority over the premises, even if that belief is mistaken.

Chief Justice Rehnquist's majority opinion held that Michigan's sobriety checkpoint program was consistent with the Fourth Amendment. Although checkpoint stops constitute seizures, the State's substantial interest in preventing drunken driving, the program's reasonable advancement of that interest, and the slight…

The Court held that Title II child’s insurance benefits are not “child support” under §602(a)(8)(A)(vi) and therefore are not subject to the $50 disregard provision, reversing the Fourth Circuit. It also concluded that the Secretary’s construction does not violate the Equal Protection Clause.

Chief Justice Rehnquist's majority opinion held that Title II Social Security child's insurance benefits are not child support payments eligible for the $50 AFDC income disregard and reversed the Fourth Circuit.

Justice White delivered the opinion of the Court, holding that an anonymous tip, corroborated by independent police observation of significant predicted behavior, supplied reasonable suspicion for the investigatory stop of White's car.

Justice Stevens delivered the unanimous opinion upholding the Montgomery Amendment. Congress may authorize members of the National Guard to undertake federal active-duty training abroad during peacetime without gubernatorial consent or a declaration of national emergency.

Justice O'Connor's opinion held that a plaintiff's voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(i) does not deprive the district court of jurisdiction to impose Rule 11 sanctions, that all aspects of a Rule 11 determination receive abuse-of-discretion review, and that Rule 11 does not authorize recovery of attorney's fees…

The Supreme Court held that the State Bar of California, as an integrated bar, is not a government agency for First Amendment purposes and therefore may not use compulsory dues to fund political or ideological activities that are not germane to its core function of regulating the legal profession.

The Court, in an opinion by Justice Stevens, held that inadvertent discovery is not a necessary condition for a warrantless seizure under the plain-view doctrine. An officer must lawfully reach the vantage point, have lawful access to the object, and immediately recognize its incriminating character.

Justice Stevens delivered the unanimous opinion holding that eligibility for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act requires only one threshold determination that the Government's position lacked substantial justification.

The Court unanimously affirmed the judgment permitting California to exercise personal jurisdiction over Burnham, who was personally served while voluntarily visiting California, although the divorce litigation was unrelated to his activities there. No rationale commanded five votes.

The Court, in an opinion by Justice Blackmun, held that burglary under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) has a uniform, generic definition independent of state offense labels: unlawful or unprivileged entry into, or remaining in, a building or structure with intent to commit a crime.

Chief Justice Rehnquist's opinion held that Whitmore lacked standing, individually or as Simmons' next friend, to challenge Simmons' execution without appellate review of his conviction and sentence.

Justice White's opinion held that an overnight guest has a legitimate expectation of privacy in the host's home and may challenge a warrantless, nonconsensual police entry to arrest him.

In a unanimous opinion by Justice Stevens, the Court held that state courts have concurrent jurisdiction over civil actions brought under Title VII. Congress did not overcome the presumption of concurrent state-court jurisdiction through Title VII’s text, legislative history, or procedural provisions.

The Court, in an opinion by Justice Scalia, held that the Free Exercise Clause does not require religious exemptions from neutral, generally applicable criminal laws. Oregon therefore could prohibit sacramental peyote use and deny unemployment benefits to employees dismissed for that use without satisfying the…

The Supreme Court held that Michigan's §54(1) campaign finance restriction, which bars corporations from using general treasury funds for independent expenditures in state elections, is constitutional under both the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

The Court held that Michigan’s § 54(1) prohibition on corporate independent expenditures in state elections is constitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments because it serves a compelling state interest and is narrowly tailored, and it affirmed the statute’s media exemption.

The Court unanimously held that findings on equitable claims do not collaterally estop litigation of common issues before a jury when the court reached those findings only because it erroneously dismissed legal claims joined in the same action.

Justice Kennedy delivered the Court’s opinion holding that a transfer under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) does not change the law applicable to a diversity action, regardless of whether the plaintiff or defendant requests transfer.

Justice Scalia delivered the Court's unanimous opinion holding that the 1987 amendments to the Bank Holding Company Act mooted Continental's challenge on the existing record because Congress had authorized Florida to exclude the FDIC-insured institution Continental sought to establish.

The Court upheld California's former capital sentencing instructions. An instruction requiring death when aggravating circumstances outweigh mitigating circumstances does not violate individualized-sentencing requirements if the jury can consider all relevant mitigating evidence.

The Court, in an opinion by Justice White, held that officers making an in-home arrest may conduct a warrantless protective sweep beyond immediately adjoining spaces when specific, articulable facts support a reasonable belief that the area harbors someone posing a danger.

The Court held that Burch's complaint adequately stated a procedural due process claim under § 1983. Although postdeprivation remedies may satisfy due process when a deprivation is random and unpredictable, that principle did not control because state officials had delegated authority to admit patients and could have…

Justice Scalia’s majority opinion held that a limited partnership is not a citizen in its own right for diversity jurisdiction and that its citizenship depends on every partner, including limited partners, regardless of their management or litigation authority.

The Court, in an opinion by Justice Blackmun, held that the Secretary's listings-only method for determining children's eligibility for Supplemental Security Income disability benefits exceeded his statutory authority.

The Supreme Court held that ERISA’s anti‑alienation provision bars the imposition of a constructive trust on a union official’s pension benefits to satisfy a union judgment, and that the LMRDA’s remedial provisions do not override this statutory bar.

Justice White delivered the Court's opinion affirming Dowling's conviction. The Court held that neither double jeopardy nor due process prohibited testimony concerning conduct for which Dowling had previously been acquitted.

Justice Kennedy's opinion for the Court held that district courts have discretion in appropriate ADEA collective actions to facilitate notice to potential plaintiffs and that discovery of the discharged employees' names and addresses was proper here.