Cases


Sitting Docket Title(link to Wiki page) Issue Argument(link to transcript) Decision(link to opinion)
14-136Smith v. BishopWhether the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution forbid the State of Oklahoma from defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman. (Opinion by )
14-63Bonner v. City of Brighton, Michigan(1) Whether certiorari should be granted to resolve the conflicting decisions between the Michigan Supreme Court and other states' courts as to whether an ordinance violates substantive and procedural due process when it creates a presumption that an unsafe structure shall be demolished as a public nuisance if the cost to repair the structure would exceed its value and when the ordinance does not afford the owner an option to repair as a matter of right; and (2) whether the Brighton code of ordinances § 18-59 is facially unconstitutional, in violation of both substantive and procedural due process, where it creates a presumption that an unsafe structure shall be demolished as a public nuisance if the cost to repair the structure would exceed 100% of the structure's true cash value as reflected in assessment tax rolls before the structure became unsafe and does not afford the owner of such a structure an option to repair as a matter of right. (Opinion by )
13-1547Ridley School District v. M. R., as Parents of E. R., a MinorWhether operation of a “stay-put” provision in 20 U.S.C. § 1415(j) – which requires that a child whose educational program under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act is under dispute to remain in his or her then-current placement while statutory “proceedings” to resolve the dispute are pending – terminates upon entry of a final judgment by a state or federal trial court in favor of the school district, as the D.C. and Sixth Circuits have held, or whether it continues until completion of any subsequent appeal of that judgment, as the Third and Ninth Circuits have held. (Opinion by )
13-1487Henderson v. United StatesWhether a felony conviction, which makes it unlawful for the defendant to possess a firearm, prevents a court under Rule 41(g) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure or under general equity principles from ordering that the government (1) transfer noncontraband firearms to an unrelated third party to whom the defendant has sold all his property interests; or (2) sell the firearms for the benefit of the defendant. (Opinion by )
14-77Kolon Industries, Incorporated v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & CompanyWhether, under 28 U.S.C. § 455(b), the federal recusal statute, a federal judge is relieved of his mandatory statutory duty of self-disqualification simply because neither party filed a timely motion to disqualify the judge. (Opinion by )
Term Snapshot
Awards