Supreme Court of the United States, 2020

The Court held in a per curiam opinion that the Ninth Circuit exceeded the limits of federal habeas review under AEDPA by substituting its own assessment of sentencing prejudice for a reasonable state-court determination.

The Court, in an opinion by Justice Kavanaugh joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Thomas, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Gorsuch, denied Texas’s motion for review of the River Master’s determination.

The Court denied Bourgeois’s application for a stay of execution and petition for certiorari without explaining its reasoning or deciding the merits. Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justice Kagan, dissented.

The Court unanimously held that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act permits litigants, when appropriate, to recover money damages against federal officials in their individual capacities.

The Court denied Bernard’s application for a stay of execution and petition for certiorari without explaining its reasoning or deciding the merits of his claims. Justices Breyer and Kagan would have granted both requests.

The Court held per curiam that Taylor’s alleged confinement for six days in extraordinarily unsanitary cells violated the Eighth Amendment and that the obvious unconstitutionality of those conditions precluded summary judgment based on the absence of sufficiently similar precedent.

The Court granted a stay of the District Court’s permanent injunction pending appellate proceedings and any timely petition for certiorari, without explaining its reasoning or resolving the merits. Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justices Breyer and Kagan, dissented.

The Court denied certiorari without addressing the merits of whether federal law preempts state taxation of non-Indian-owned electronic gambling equipment located on tribal land. Justice Thomas dissented, with no justice joining his opinion.

The Court denied certiorari without deciding the merits. Justice Gorsuch, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan, issued a statement respecting the denial explaining that the wardens' search around Bovat's garage exceeded the implied license to approach a home's front door under Florida v. Jardines.

The Court denied certiorari without deciding the merits of Kaur’s Sixth Amendment claim. Justice Sotomayor, writing alone in a statement respecting the denial, agreed that further consideration by lower courts was warranted before review.

The supplied text begins midway through Justice Alito's dissent and omits the Court's order; it therefore establishes no holding or disposition of the Court. Outside confirmation was not available.

Justice Thomas dissents, arguing that Congress lacks authority to issue legislative subpoenas for the President’s private, non‑official documents and must rely on its impeachment power. He critiques the majority’s reliance on McGrain and historical analogies, emphasizing the Constitution’s limited enumerated powers.

Justice Alito dissents, arguing that congressional subpoenas for a President's personal documents are inherently suspicious and that the Court's remand fails to require the House to demonstrate a legitimate legislative purpose.

Chief Justice Roberts, joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, held that congressional subpoenas for a President’s personal records require special scrutiny reflecting the separation of powers, even when directed to third parties.

The Court held that congressional subpoenas for the President's personal financial information are permissible only if they satisfy a careful, four‑part test balancing a valid legislative purpose against separation‑of‑powers concerns, vacated the appellate judgments and remanded the cases for further proceedings.

Justice Gorsuch, joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, held that Congress established a Creek reservation and never disestablished its remaining territory. Allotment, restrictions on tribal government, historical state prosecutions, and demographic changes did not supply the necessary…

Justice Thomas dissents, arguing that the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to review the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals decision because that decision rests on an adequate, independent state procedural ground.

The Court affirmed the Fourth Circuit, invalidating the government-debt exception to the federal cell-phone robocall restriction while leaving the underlying restriction intact. Justice Kavanaugh's severability analysis commanded a majority: the Communications Act's express severability clause required severance, and…

Justice Sotomayor dissents, arguing that the Court lacks authority to decide a federal constitutional question not raised in the state courts and that the Montana scholarship program no longer exists, eliminating any as‑applied Free Exercise claim.

Justice Breyer dissents, arguing that adding ".com" to a generic term does not make it protectable under trademark law and that the majority's reliance on consumer surveys is misplaced.

Justice Alito concurs with the Court’s judgment that Montana’s constitutional prohibition on state aid to “sectarian” schools, as applied to a tax‑credit scholarship program, violates the Free Exercise Clause.

The Court held that the Leadership Act’s requirement that funding recipients explicitly oppose prostitution and sex trafficking may constitutionally be applied to American organizations’ legally distinct foreign affiliates operating abroad.

Justice Gorsuch, dissenting, argues that the majority disregarded fundamental judicial rules on legislative deference, standing, facial challenges, and injunctive relief, and that the decision improperly overturns established doctrine.

The Court held that insulating the CFPB’s single Director, who exercises substantial executive authority, from presidential removal except for cause violates the separation of powers. It rejected threshold objections to adjudicating that challenge.

Justice Thomas concurs with the Court’s judgment that the Leadership Act’s Policy Requirement does not violate the First Amendment when applied to respondents’ foreign affiliates. He argues the requirement does not compel speech because it imposes no obligation to say anything.

The Court held that insulating the CFPB’s single Director from presidential removal violates the separation of powers because the Director is a principal officer exercising substantial executive authority. It declined to extend Humphrey’s Executor or Morrison to that structure without overruling either decision.

Justice Kavanaugh, dissenting, argues that the Court should remand for additional fact‑finding and that the abortion providers lack Article III standing, rendering the majority's injunction improper.

Justice Alito, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, held that the statutory restrictions on habeas review of expedited removal were constitutional as applied to Thuraissigiam.

Justice Thomas dissents, arguing that disgorgement is not "equitable relief" under 15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)(5) and therefore the majority’s vacatur and remand are erroneous; he would reverse the Ninth Circuit’s disgorgement award.

Chief Justice Roberts's opinion for the Court held that DHS's rescission of DACA was judicially reviewable and arbitrary and capricious because DHS failed to consider retaining removal forbearance separately from benefits eligibility and failed to consider reliance interests.

Justice Gorsuch, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, held that Title VII prohibits firing an individual merely for being gay or transgender because such discrimination necessarily involves intentional discrimination based in part on the individual's sex.

The Court, in a per curiam opinion, held that Andrus demonstrated constitutionally deficient representation during his capital sentencing proceedings. Counsel conducted virtually no mitigation investigation, presented testimony that undermined the mitigation case, and failed adequately to investigate or rebut…

The Court held that a dismissal for failure to state a claim counts as a strike under the Prison Litigation Reform Act regardless of whether it is with or without prejudice, and affirmed the Tenth Circuit’s judgment denying Lomax permission to proceed in forma pauperis.

Certiorari was denied; the supplied text contains only Justice Sotomayor’s statement respecting that denial, not a merits opinion of the Court. Writing without any noted joiners, Sotomayor questioned the Eleventh Circuit’s practice of treating published orders denying authorization for successive habeas petitions as…

The Court denied certiorari without addressing the merits of the First Amendment challenge to Wisconsin's mandatory state bar dues. Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Gorsuch, dissented, arguing that Janus's overruling of Abood undermined the foundation of Keller and warranted reconsideration of Keller.

The Court, in an opinion by Justice Kavanaugh, affirmed on Article III grounds the dismissal of defined-benefit pension participants’ ERISA fiduciary-mismanagement suit. Because the participants had received their promised benefits and the litigation would not change their future payments, they lacked a concrete…

Justice Sotomayor concurs with the Court that the New York Convention does not bar the use of domestic doctrines like equitable estoppel to enforce arbitration agreements, but she stresses that any such doctrine must be grounded in the parties' consent to arbitrate under the FAA.