Supreme Court of the United States, 1999

The Court held that the Fourth Amendment does not permit a general “crime scene” or “murder scene” exception to the warrant requirement, reversing the West Virginia trial court’s approval of a warrantless search of a closed briefcase at a homicide scene and remanding for further proceedings.

Chief Justice Rehnquist, joined by Justices O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas, held that the Patent Remedy Act did not validly abrogate state sovereign immunity. Although Congress unmistakably intended abrogation, Article I supplied no authority for it, and the Act was not congruent and proportional enforcement…

The Court reversed certification of a mandatory asbestos settlement class under Rule 23(b)(1)(B). Assuming without deciding that a limited-fund class could encompass such tort claims, the Court required evidence establishing the fund's limits independently of the parties' agreement, inclusion of claimants whose claims…

Justice Kennedy, joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices O'Connor, Scalia, and Thomas, held that Congress's Article I powers do not authorize private damages suits against nonconsenting States in their own courts.

Justice Scalia, joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices O'Connor, Kennedy, and Thomas, held that Florida's sovereign immunity barred this Lanham Act false-advertising suit.

The Court held that unjustified institutional isolation of persons with disabilities constitutes discrimination under Title II of the ADA. Community placement is required when state treatment professionals find it appropriate, the affected individuals do not oppose it, and placement can be reasonably accommodated…

Justice O'Connor's opinion for the Court affirmed dismissal of the applicants' ADA claims. Disability must be assessed with reference to the positive and negative effects of mitigating measures; because the applicants alleged that corrective lenses restored normal vision and functioning, they had not alleged an actual…

Justice Souter's opinion held that Albertson's could insist on compliance with the Department of Transportation's binding vision standard without independently justifying that standard under the ADA, despite an experimental waiver program that did not substantively modify the standard. That conclusion was unanimous.

Justice O'Connor's opinion, supported by different majorities for its principal parts, held that punitive damages under Title VII do not require independently egregious misconduct. Instead, the employer must discriminate with knowledge that it may be violating federal law.

Justice O'Connor's opinion for the Court held that mitigating measures must be considered when determining disability under the ADA and that Murphy failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact that UPS regarded him as substantially limited in working.

The Court held that the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s fee‑cap provision applies only to post‑judgment monitoring services performed after the Act’s effective date and does not limit fees for services performed before that date, affirming in part and reversing in part the Sixth Circuit.

The Court affirmed Jones's federal death sentence. Justice Thomas's majority opinion held that jury deadlock transfers sentencing responsibility to the judge under the Federal Death Penalty Act, but the Eighth Amendment does not require an instruction explaining that consequence, and the Court declined to require one…

The Court held that the Prison Litigation Reform Act's attorney-fee cap does not apply to postjudgment monitoring work performed before the Act's effective date, because applying it to completed work would have retroactive effect absent a clear congressional directive.

The Court, in an opinion by Justice Stevens, affirmed the Fourth Circuit's judgment denying habeas relief. Although the Commonwealth suppressed favorable impeachment evidence, and its suppression, open-file policy, and subsequent assurances together established cause for the procedural default, Strickler failed to…

The Supreme Court held that a federal district court lacks the power, in an action for money damages, to issue a preliminary injunction freezing a defendant's assets when the plaintiff claims no lien or equitable interest in them, because such pre-judgment relief was historically unavailable from courts of equity and…

Justice Thomas, writing for a unanimous Court, held that an order imposing discovery sanctions on an attorney under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a)(4) is not immediately appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, even when the attorney no longer represents a party.

The Court affirmed the Illinois Supreme Court's judgment invalidating Chicago's gang congregation ordinance. Stevens wrote for six Justices in Parts I, II, and V, holding that the ordinance's definition of loitering as remaining in one place with no apparent purpose supplied insufficient standards to constrain police…

The Court held that omission of an offense element from jury instructions is subject to harmless-error review, rather than automatic reversal. It affirmed Neder's tax convictions because the omitted materiality element was uncontested and supported by overwhelming evidence.

The Court reversed and remanded, concluding that admitting Mark Lilly's untested confession violated petitioner's Confrontation Clause rights and leaving harmless-error review to the Virginia courts. A majority also concluded that petitioner adequately preserved his constitutional claim.

Justice Breyer, joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices Stevens, Scalia, Souter, and Thomas, held that a federal jury convicting a defendant of engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise must unanimously agree on each individual drug-law violation necessary to constitute the continuing series.

The unanimous Court held that applying for or receiving Social Security Disability Insurance benefits neither automatically estops a claimant from pursuing an ADA employment-discrimination claim nor creates a special presumption against that claim.

The Court held that the FTC has jurisdiction over the California Dental Association because it provides substantial economic benefits to its for‑profit members, and vacated the Ninth Circuit’s judgment that a quick‑look rule‑of‑reason analysis was sufficient, remanding for a fuller rule‑of‑reason inquiry.

Justice O'Connor, joined by Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, held that a federal funding recipient may be liable in damages under Title IX for deliberate indifference to known student-on-student sexual harassment when it exercises substantial control over both the harasser and the context and the…

Justice Souter's opinion unanimously held that the FTC has jurisdiction over the California Dental Association because its activities confer substantial economic benefits on its for-profit members.

The Court affirmed the judgment sustaining Del Monte Dunes’ jury verdict against Monterey. Justice Kennedy’s opinion held that Dolan’s rough-proportionality test did not apply to the denial of development at issue, that the city could not challenge instructions it had effectively proposed, and that a § 1983 action…

Justice Breyer concurs with the majority that the FTC has jurisdiction and that the rule‑of‑reason framework applies, but dissents in part, arguing that the Commission’s factual findings are supported by substantial evidence and that the restraints on price and quality advertising unreasonably restrict competition.

Justice Ginsburg delivered the unanimous opinion holding that federal courts need not invariably decide subject-matter jurisdiction before personal jurisdiction, including in removed cases.

Justice Souter, writing for a unanimous Court, held that the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces lacked jurisdiction to issue an injunction under the All Writs Act to prevent the President and other officials from dropping the respondent from the Air Force rolls, and therefore reversed the CAAF’s judgment.

The Court, in an opinion authored by Justice Thomas and joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist, Justices O'Connor, Scalia, and Kennedy, reversed the District Court's grant of summary judgment, holding that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding the legislative motive behind North Carolina's Twelfth Congressional…

Justice Kennedy, writing for a unanimous Court, held that the Court of Appeals failed to accord Chevron deference to the BIA’s interpretation of the serious nonpolitical crime exception to withholding of deportation. The BIA permissibly declined to balance the applicant’s crimes against his risk of persecution.

The Court, in an opinion by Justice Scalia joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices O'Connor, Kennedy, Thomas, and Breyer, held that probable cause to search a car permits officers to search passengers' belongings inside it that could conceal the object of the search, without individualized probable cause…

Chief Justice Rehnquist, writing for eight Justices, held that executing a search warrant against an attorney does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment liberty to practice one's profession, even when timed to prevent consultation with a grand jury witness.

The Court, in an opinion by Justice Souter joined by Justices Stevens, Scalia, Thomas, and Ginsburg, held that the federal carjacking statute defined three separate offenses, with serious bodily injury and death constituting elements rather than sentencing factors.

Justice Breyer's opinion held that Rule 702's reliability gatekeeping obligation applies to all expert testimony, including technical and experience-based testimony. Daubert's factors are flexible rather than mandatory or exhaustive, and abuse-of-discretion review governs both the selection of reliability measures and…

Chief Justice Rehnquist's opinion held that private workers' compensation insurers do not engage in state action when they withhold payment for disputed medical treatment pending utilization review, and that employees have no protected property interest in payment before the treatment is established to be reasonable…

The Court, in an opinion by Justice Stevens joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, held that the federal carjacking statute's intent requirement includes an intent to kill or seriously harm the driver if necessary to obtain the car.

Justice Scalia's majority opinion held that § 1252(g) bars jurisdiction over respondents' collateral selective-enforcement challenge to the commencement of deportation proceedings.

Justice Scalia's opinion for the Court held that the FCC has authority to implement the Telecommunications Act of 1996's local-competition provisions, including prescribing a pricing methodology, but that a challenge to its asserted authority to review state-approved agreements was unripe.

Justice Thomas, writing for a unanimous Court, held that Hughes’ amendments to its defined benefit pension plan did not violate ERISA. Participants had rights to their accrued benefits, not to the plan’s surplus, and using surplus assets to pay benefits under a new noncontributory structure did not violate the vesting…