477:
because those payments could not be allocated to other Coal
Companies that were currently operating in the coal industry. The Plurality said that the retroactive effect of the statute worked a substantial economic injury on Eastern that could not have been anticipated (2) The statute interferes with distinct investment backed expectations of Eastern Enterprises for much the same reason. In 1987 Eastern Enterprises sold off its remaining holdings in Coal operations and as such completely removed itself from the industry. The statute's requirement that Eastern Enterprises now undertake the obligation at issue clearly interfered with expectations of Eastern when it sold off its interest in coal operations. (3) The nature of the government action was such that it retroactively applied a substantial economic burden on Eastern Enterprises and such is unusual. The character of the government action is substantial and invasive. The balance of the factors lead towards a finding of an unconstitutional taking requiring just compensation.
555:
from the
Reachback Tax to dozens of corporations, mom and pop companies and even individuals economically ravaged by the mandate to pay for healthcare benefits for individuals who had virtually no association with those being taxed or assessed the obligations of the Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992. That act provided for arguably the most generous fully paid healthcare benefits in the nation, including pregnancy termination for family members of those designated as beneficiaries of the Reachback Tax. The anti-Reachback Tax Coalition toiled at local, state and national levels to effect relief. The efforts of the coalition included numerous Federal district court cases and appeals prior to the Supreme Court's landmark Eastern v. Apfel ruling. Those efforts included a series of paid media op-eds addressed to former U.S. Senator
400:
health care as expected. As time wore on, the pensions slowly sank into depression as more and more coal operators withdrew from plan. Eastern
Enterprises was a signatory to the pension plans since 1950 until it sold off its holdings in coal operations in 1987. In 1992 Congress passed the Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992 which required former Coal Operators to pay into the pension in certain situations when the former employee had worked for the company. Such requirement was in place even when the operator no longer was in the Coal Industry. Here, Eastern Enterprises was required to pay into the pension plans for some 100 past employees even though it had sold off its holdings in coal operations.
31:
531:, 231 Ill.2d 62, 896 N.E.2d 277, 324 Ill.Dec. 491 (Ill. Jun 05, 2008) specifically relied on Justice Breyer's interpretation and determined that in cases of economic regulation the Petitioner must overcome the presumption of Constitutionality with a showing of fundamental unfairness. While the case has not been overruled, it is continually questioned in many State Supreme Courts and Courts of Appeal. Currently a writ of certiorari is pending in the
447:
substantial burden, and it does so retroactively. Concurrence: The statute is unconstitutional because it is an ex post facto law that retroactively imposes liability. Dissent: Takings jurisprudence should not be employed to decide if an economic regulation is proper. Traditional notions of due process are to be employed in such instances requiring an examination under rational basis scrutiny.
614:
309:
the government from forcing some people alone to bear public burdens which, in all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole. However, while the plurality seems to invalidate this particular law on takings grounds, the concurrences and the dissents warn of such an analysis as this should actually be examined under
489:
Justice
Kennedy concurs in judgment, but feels that the takings analysis employed by the Plurality is unnecessary. Justice Kennedy explained that the retroactive nature of the law results in its unconstitutionality without having to resort to a takings analysis. Justice Kennedy goes even further to
298:, such as the economic impact of the regulation, its interference with reasonable investment backed expectations, and the character of the governmental action. The decision thereby moved beyond the traditional notions of equal protection which had been applied to economic regulation since the time of
554:
A coalition of corporations and individuals formerly in the coal industry and severely diminished by imposition of the so-called
Reachback Tax resisted this illegal taking for over six years through a coalition. The Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel case brought some partial and desperately needed relief
476:
The
Plurality argued as follows: (1) The economic impact of the Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992 resulted was substantial as to Petitioner in that it forced Eastern Enterprises to contribute millions of dollars to a pension fund for employees is employed in the 1950s and 1960s solely
382:
grounds that economic regulation was beyond the power of
Congress. Third, the Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992 was passed to remedy the insolvent pension plans of the coal mining labors which had been in place since the 1950s. Fourth, and perhaps not independent, the Court examined
308:
analysis to the problem resulting in a much less deferential result. While the plurality recognizes that this is not a traditional takings case where the government appropriates private property for public use, they also state this is the type of case where the "Armstrong
Principle" of preventing
502:
There is no need to torture the takings clause to fit this case. The matter should be evaluated under the due process clause and traditional notions of fundamental fairness. The law imposes upon
Eastern the burden of showing that the statute, because of its retroactive effect, is fundamentally
446:
factors and is thus a compensable taking. Specifically, Eastern
Enterprises' (1) economic impact is substantial, (2) the Act interferes substantially with distinct investment backed expectations, and (3) the nature of the government action is unusual as it requires certain individuals to bear a
399:
In 1950 and 1974, the Coal Mining industry established a pension plan for its workers. Under the plans, workers and their families believed they were to receive a pension and future healthcare. The healthcare aspects of the plan however, were disputed and the Coal Companies did not provide the
408:
Eastern Enterprises filed suit against the Commissioner of Social Security in the District Court of Massachusetts. The District Court granted Summary Judgment for the Respondent and upheld the Commissioner's interpretation of the statute. Eastern Enterprises then appealed to the
291:
of property which required the Act to be invalidated. The import of this decision is that it was made in the context of a purely economic regulation. The plurality examines the statute and its resultant harm as an ad hoc factual inquiry based on factors delineated in
537:
case which has not yet been decided upon. Additionally, the Court's ruling did not provide relief to coal companies similarly situated to Eastern who had settled their constitutional claims prior to the Court's ruling rather than pursuing appellate litigation.
559:(D-W.Va.), an original sponsor of the act and tax, which appeared on Page 3 of The Washington Post. Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue's Washington office coordinated that coalition through its long-time Congressional consultant Sam Richardson.
2333:
2501:
2044:
459:
factors applied in cases of economic regulation as a way to find a statute unconstitutional when it effects a taking of property for public use without just compensation. (Rule is limited by the fact that this is a plurality)
2461:
620:
355:
There are actually several different legal doctrines at work in this case. First, the case was decided under United States Supreme Court takings jurisprudence. The plurality looked to the factors enunciated in
2626:
2365:
2141:
434:
The Plurality considered the issue of (1) whether the Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992 as applied to Eastern Enterprises constitutes a taking for which just compensation is required
329:
Eastern Enterprises, former coal company that had been assessed the responsibility to fund pensions of many former employees as a function of the Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992
468:
The Court held that (1) the Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992 as applied to Eastern Enterprises constitutes an unconstitutional taking, requiring the statute to be enjoined;
262:
759:
692:
667:
642:
601:
568:
72:
578:
496:
Regardless of how the statute is analyzed, the Petitioner has not met the required burden to overcome the presumption of constitutionality that accompanies a Congressional Act.
410:
2525:
2509:
2349:
904:
863:
369:
258:
2277:
895:
637:
294:
490:
state that the takings analysis of the Plurality is not supported by the prevailing case law as no specific property interest was taken as a function of the statute.
1716:
907:
2309:
2205:
2621:
2565:
533:
527:
2636:
573:
2646:
2549:
2429:
854:
2616:
2405:
2373:
2485:
341:
BITUMINOUS COAL OPERATORS' ASSOCIATION, INC., UMWA COMBINED BENEFIT FUND AND ITS TRUSTEES, and the representatives of other extensive interests.
2651:
1724:
1980:
1376:
2229:
888:
391:
analysis while the concurrence and the dissents actually looked at it as a distinct basis to hold the Congressional Act unconstitutional.
2317:
1772:
2533:
2517:
2341:
2301:
2125:
280:
266:
35:
2641:
921:
368:
therein have been used to determine when a regulation rises to the level of a taking thereby requiring just compensation under the
2631:
2389:
1700:
1525:
1121:
2181:
360:
to determine if the enacted legislation functioned to deprive Eastern Enterprises of property without just compensation. Since
2060:
1972:
1301:
881:
387:
nature of the effect of the Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992 on Eastern. The majority examined such under its
284:
2469:
2437:
2189:
2173:
2052:
2213:
2133:
2581:
2557:
2477:
1188:
90:) 1225; 98 Cal. Daily Op. Service 5036; 98 Daily Journal DAR 6937; 1998 Colo. J. C.A.R. 3281; 11 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 755
1325:
1258:
1022:
847:
2325:
1065:
2237:
2012:
2493:
2285:
2269:
1613:
1541:
950:
687:
2453:
2381:
2117:
2036:
1868:
1425:
1089:
966:
2253:
503:
unfair or unjust. Eastern has failed to show that the law unfairly upset its legitimately settled expectations.
2573:
2293:
2020:
1796:
1533:
1392:
2397:
2149:
1341:
550:, "TAKING REGULATORY TAKINGS PERSONALLY: THE PERILS OF (MIS)REASONING BY ANALOGY," 51 Ala. L. Rev. 1355 (2000)
2109:
1828:
1581:
1437:
2413:
2221:
2157:
1764:
1573:
1333:
1277:
1223:
1156:
1148:
1081:
982:
873:
840:
779:
365:
310:
1073:
815:
738:
717:
111:
2261:
1932:
1908:
1788:
1692:
1684:
1557:
1501:
1207:
1180:
1172:
1105:
1046:
1038:
1003:
163:
1756:
1708:
2101:
1948:
1884:
1605:
1477:
1445:
1317:
1215:
934:
763:
696:
671:
646:
605:
547:
64:
2541:
1964:
1916:
1461:
2197:
1900:
1892:
1844:
1852:
1820:
1368:
1239:
2093:
1940:
1860:
1836:
1804:
1597:
1565:
1517:
1509:
1469:
1285:
1129:
797:
662:
374:
300:
191:
2589:
1988:
1812:
1672:
1549:
1485:
1453:
1400:
1384:
974:
305:
806:
2421:
2004:
1780:
1740:
1732:
1589:
1293:
1231:
1113:
288:
155:
147:
129:
2245:
1956:
1748:
1637:
1493:
1360:
1309:
788:
54:
Eastern Enterprises, Petitioner v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security, et al.
2357:
1924:
1629:
1164:
1097:
1030:
556:
187:
175:
832:
699:
132:
requiring compensation depends on the extent of diminution in the value of the property.
2165:
2081:
1876:
1621:
958:
770:
649:
608:
199:
167:
674:
2610:
1996:
1645:
942:
384:
314:
87:
2028:
525:
The holding of this case has been continually called into question. Most recently
179:
67:
413:
which affirmed the lower court's holding. The Supreme Court granted Certiorari.
379:
2334:
Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City
2502:
Stop the Beach Renourishment v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection
83:
79:
421:
Eastern Enterprises seeks reversal of the order granting summary judgment.
2045:
Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California
2462:
Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency
115:
824:
517:
Court of Appeals First Circuit judgment reversed and matter remanded.
2142:
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. City of Chicago
108:
2366:
First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. Los Angeles County
2079:
1670:
1423:
1001:
919:
877:
836:
30:
2486:
San Remo Hotel, L.P. v. City & County of San Francisco
304:, requiring extreme deference to Congress, and applied a
2627:
United States Supreme Court cases of the Rehnquist Court
621:
public domain material from this U.S government document
569:
List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 524
2510:
Arkansas Game & Fish Commission v. United States
579:
Lists of United States Supreme Court cases by volume
411:
United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
2526:
Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District
1352:
1269:
1250:
1199:
1140:
1057:
1014:
252:
244:
236:
228:
220:
212:
207:
136:
122:
100:
95:
86:
4213; 66 U.S.L.W. 4566; 22 Employee Benefits Cas. (
59:
49:
42:
23:
335:Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security
2278:Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City
638:Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City
295:Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City
267:Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992
1717:Railroad Retirement Board v. Alton Railroad Co.
2350:Keystone Bituminous Coal Ass'n v. DeBenedictis
889:
848:
632:
630:
216:O'Connor, joined by Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas
8:
2310:Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp.
2302:Webb's Fabulous Pharmacies, Inc. v. Beckwith
2390:Preseault v. Interstate Commerce Commission
2206:Louisville Joint Stock Land Bank v. Radford
287:(Coal Act) constituted an unconstitutional
248:Breyer, joined by Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg
240:Stevens, joined by Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer
2566:Pakdel v. City and County of San Francisco
2182:Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co. v. United States
2076:
1667:
1420:
1011:
998:
916:
896:
882:
874:
855:
841:
833:
534:Empress Casino Joliet Corp. v. Giannoulias
528:Empress Casino Joliet Corp. v. Giannoulias
481:Notable concurring and dissenting opinions
20:
574:List of United States Supreme Court cases
2550:Knick v. Township of Scott, Pennsylvania
2430:Suitum v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency
378:the Court has been reluctant to find on
285:Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act
2470:Brown v. Legal Foundation of Washington
2438:Phillips v. Washington Legal Foundation
2406:Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council
2374:Nollan v. California Coastal Commission
2190:Rindge Company v. County of Los Angeles
590:
128:Whether a regulatory act constitutes a
1725:United States v. Carolene Products Co.
283:case in which the Court held that the
2534:Horne v. Department of Agriculture II
2214:United States v. General Motors Corp.
2134:Monongahela Nav. Co. v. United States
1377:Louisiana ex rel. Francis v. Resweber
18:1998 United States Supreme Court case
7:
2518:Horne v. Department of Agriculture I
2230:Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States
442:Plurality: The statute violates the
2318:Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff
1773:Department of Agriculture v. Moreno
2342:United States v. Riverside Bayview
2126:Head v. Amoskeag Manufacturing Co.
1981:Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña
36:Supreme Court of the United States
14:
2622:United States Supreme Court cases
766:498 (1998) is available from:
734:Coltec Industries Inc. v. Hobgood
2637:Coal mining in the United States
2326:Ruckelshaus v. Montanato Company
1122:Bravo-Fernandez v. United States
612:
29:
2647:Retirement in the United States
2238:United States v. Pewee Coal Co.
1973:Metro Broadcasting, Inc. v. FCC
2617:1998 in United States case law
2174:Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon
2053:United States v. Vaello Madero
2013:Flores-Villar v. United States
1:
2652:United States health case law
2582:Sheetz v. County of El Dorado
2558:Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid
2478:Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc.
2286:Kaiser Aetna v. United States
1701:Adkins v. Children's Hospital
905:United States Fifth Amendment
864:United States Fifth Amendment
713:Eastern Enterprises v. Chater
455:The plurality ruled that the
105:Eastern Enterprises v. Chater
2446:Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel
2061:Department of State v. Muñoz
1326:Puerto Rico v. Sanchez Valle
1259:Blockburger v. United States
1023:Blockburger v. United States
756:Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel
598:Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel
364:, the factors enunciated by
279:, 524 U.S. 498 (1998), is a
276:Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel
24:Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel
2382:Pennell v. City of San Jose
2037:Sessions v. Morales-Santana
1066:United States v. Randenbush
281:United States Supreme Court
2668:
2494:Kelo v. City of New London
2270:Armstrong v. United States
2254:Nelson v. City of New York
1614:J. D. B. v. North Carolina
1542:Dickerson v. United States
951:Wong Wing v. United States
825:Oyez (oral argument audio)
688:Armstrong v. United States
619:This article incorporates
2454:Palazzolo v. Rhode Island
2118:Cole v. City of La Grange
2088:
2075:
1869:United States v. Antelope
1679:
1666:
1526:Mitchell v. United States
1432:
1426:Self-Incrimination Clause
1419:
1270:Dual sovereignty doctrine
1090:Fong Foo v. United States
1015:Meaning of "same offense"
1010:
997:
967:United States v. Moreland
929:
915:
871:
720: (1st Cir. 1997).
257:
141:
127:
28:
2642:Social Security lawsuits
2574:Tyler v. Hennepin County
2398:Yee v. City of Escondido
2294:Agins v. City of Tiburon
2150:Peabody v. United States
2021:United States v. Windsor
1797:Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld
1534:United States v. Hubbell
1393:North Carolina v. Pearce
1342:Denezpi v. United States
1302:United States v. Wheeler
741: (3d Cir. 2002).
493:Stevens, J., dissenting.
486:Kennedy, J., concurring.
2632:Takings Clause case law
2414:Dolan v. City of Tigard
2222:United States v. Causby
2110:United States v. Lawton
1829:Hampton v. Mow Sun Wong
1765:Frontiero v. Richardson
1582:Corley v. United States
1574:United States v. Patane
1438:Curcio v. United States
1334:Gamble v. United States
1224:United States v. Dinitz
1157:Ludwig v. Massachusetts
1149:United States v. Wilson
1082:Burton v. United States
983:United States v. Cotton
499:Breyer, J., dissenting.
311:substantive due process
2158:United States v. Cress
1933:Fullilove v. Klutznick
1789:Schlesinger v. Ballard
1693:Adair v. United States
1685:Dred Scott v. Sandford
1558:Yarborough v. Alvarado
1278:United States v. Lanza
1208:United States v. Perez
1189:Smith v. United States
1181:United States v. Dixon
1173:United States v. Felix
1106:Burks v. United States
1047:United States v. Dixon
1039:United States v. Felix
1004:Double Jeopardy Clause
2102:Kohl v. United States
1606:Berghuis v. Thompkins
1446:Griffin v. California
1318:United States v. Lara
1216:United States v. Jorn
1074:Ball v. United States
935:Hurtado v. California
259:U.S. Const. amends. V
78:118 S. Ct. 2131; 141
45:Decided June 25, 1998
2262:United States v. Dow
1909:Califano v. Westcott
1853:Califano v. Goldfarb
1502:Doe v. United States
1369:Palko v. Connecticut
1240:Blueford v. Arkansas
739:280 F.3d 262
718:110 F.3d 150
513:Judgment/disposition
332:Defendant/Respondent
326:Plaintiff/Petitioner
43:Argued March 4, 1998
2094:Barron v. Baltimore
1941:Rostker v. Goldberg
1861:Califano v. Webster
1837:Washington v. Davis
1805:Mathews v. Eldridge
1757:Richardson v. Davis
1709:Nichols v. Coolidge
1598:Maryland v. Shatzer
1566:Missouri v. Seibert
1518:McNeil v. Wisconsin
1510:Illinois v. Perkins
1470:Williams v. Florida
1286:Bartkus v. Illinois
1251:Multiple punishment
1130:McElrath v. Georgia
816:Library of Congress
663:Lochner v. New York
375:Lochner v. New York
301:Lochner v. New York
192:Ruth Bader Ginsburg
164:Sandra Day O'Connor
2590:DeVillier v. Texas
1989:Miller v. Albright
1949:Heckler v. Mathews
1885:Califano v. Torres
1813:Hills v. Gautreaux
1673:Due Process Clause
1550:Chavez v. Martinez
1486:Edwards v. Arizona
1478:Michigan v. Tucker
1454:Miranda v. Arizona
1401:Benton v. Maryland
1385:Baxstrom v. Herold
975:Beck v. Washington
908:criminal procedure
548:Michael Allen Wolf
521:Subsequent history
438:Arguments/theories
417:Procedural posture
306:regulatory takings
152:Associate Justices
2604:
2603:
2600:
2599:
2542:Murr v. Wisconsin
2422:Babbitt v. Youpee
2071:
2070:
2005:Zadvydas v. Davis
1965:Bowen v. Gilliard
1917:Harris v. Rosario
1781:Morton v. Mancari
1741:Schneider v. Rusk
1733:Bolling v. Sharpe
1660:
1659:
1656:
1655:
1590:Florida v. Powell
1462:Boulden v. Holman
1415:
1414:
1411:
1410:
1294:Waller v. Florida
1232:Oregon v. Kennedy
1114:Evans v. Michigan
993:
992:
542:Selected articles
372:. Second, since
289:regulatory taking
272:
271:
148:William Rehnquist
2659:
2246:Berman v. Parker
2198:Leonard v. Earle
2077:
1957:Lyng v. Castillo
1901:Davis v. Passman
1893:Vance v. Bradley
1845:Mathews v. Lucas
1749:Rogers v. Bellei
1668:
1638:Salinas v. Texas
1494:Oregon v. Elstad
1421:
1361:Ex parte Bigelow
1310:Heath v. Alabama
1141:After conviction
1012:
999:
917:
898:
891:
884:
875:
857:
850:
843:
834:
829:
823:
820:
814:
811:
805:
802:
796:
793:
787:
784:
778:
775:
769:
742:
736:
727:
721:
715:
709:
703:
684:
678:
659:
653:
634:
625:
616:
615:
595:
137:Court membership
33:
32:
21:
2667:
2666:
2662:
2661:
2660:
2658:
2657:
2656:
2607:
2606:
2605:
2596:
2358:Hodel v. Irving
2084:
2067:
1925:Harris v. McRae
1821:Mathews v. Diaz
1675:
1662:
1661:
1652:
1630:Howes v. Fields
1428:
1407:
1348:
1265:
1246:
1195:
1165:Grady v. Corbin
1136:
1098:Ashe v. Swenson
1058:After acquittal
1053:
1031:Grady v. Corbin
1006:
989:
925:
911:
902:
867:
861:
827:
821:
818:
812:
809:
803:
800:
794:
791:
785:
782:
776:
773:
767:
751:
746:
745:
732:
728:
724:
711:
710:
706:
685:
681:
660:
656:
635:
628:
613:
596:
592:
587:
565:
557:Jay Rockefeller
544:
523:
515:
510:
483:
474:
466:
453:
440:
432:
427:
419:
406:
397:
370:Fifth Amendment
366:Justice Brennan
353:
348:
323:
190:
188:Clarence Thomas
178:
176:Anthony Kennedy
166:
156:John P. Stevens
91:
44:
38:
19:
12:
11:
5:
2665:
2663:
2655:
2654:
2649:
2644:
2639:
2634:
2629:
2624:
2619:
2609:
2608:
2602:
2601:
2598:
2597:
2595:
2594:
2586:
2578:
2570:
2562:
2554:
2546:
2538:
2530:
2522:
2514:
2506:
2498:
2490:
2482:
2474:
2466:
2458:
2450:
2442:
2434:
2426:
2418:
2410:
2402:
2394:
2386:
2378:
2370:
2362:
2354:
2346:
2338:
2330:
2322:
2314:
2306:
2298:
2290:
2282:
2274:
2266:
2258:
2250:
2242:
2234:
2226:
2218:
2210:
2202:
2194:
2186:
2178:
2170:
2166:Block v. Hirsh
2162:
2154:
2146:
2138:
2130:
2122:
2114:
2106:
2098:
2089:
2086:
2085:
2082:Takings Clause
2080:
2073:
2072:
2069:
2068:
2066:
2065:
2057:
2049:
2041:
2033:
2025:
2017:
2009:
2001:
1993:
1985:
1977:
1969:
1961:
1953:
1945:
1937:
1929:
1921:
1913:
1905:
1897:
1889:
1881:
1877:Fiallo v. Bell
1873:
1865:
1857:
1849:
1841:
1833:
1825:
1817:
1809:
1801:
1793:
1785:
1777:
1769:
1761:
1753:
1745:
1737:
1729:
1721:
1713:
1705:
1697:
1689:
1680:
1677:
1676:
1671:
1664:
1663:
1658:
1657:
1654:
1653:
1651:
1650:
1642:
1634:
1626:
1622:Bobby v. Dixon
1618:
1610:
1602:
1594:
1586:
1578:
1570:
1562:
1554:
1546:
1538:
1530:
1522:
1514:
1506:
1498:
1490:
1482:
1474:
1466:
1458:
1450:
1442:
1433:
1430:
1429:
1424:
1417:
1416:
1413:
1412:
1409:
1408:
1406:
1405:
1397:
1389:
1381:
1373:
1365:
1356:
1354:
1350:
1349:
1347:
1346:
1338:
1330:
1322:
1314:
1306:
1298:
1290:
1282:
1273:
1271:
1267:
1266:
1264:
1263:
1254:
1252:
1248:
1247:
1245:
1244:
1236:
1228:
1220:
1212:
1203:
1201:
1200:After mistrial
1197:
1196:
1194:
1193:
1185:
1177:
1169:
1161:
1153:
1144:
1142:
1138:
1137:
1135:
1134:
1126:
1118:
1110:
1102:
1094:
1086:
1078:
1070:
1061:
1059:
1055:
1054:
1052:
1051:
1043:
1035:
1027:
1018:
1016:
1008:
1007:
1002:
995:
994:
991:
990:
988:
987:
979:
971:
963:
959:Maxwell v. Dow
955:
947:
939:
930:
927:
926:
920:
913:
912:
903:
901:
900:
893:
886:
878:
872:
869:
868:
862:
860:
859:
852:
845:
837:
831:
830:
798:Google Scholar
750:
749:External links
747:
744:
743:
722:
704:
679:
654:
626:
589:
588:
586:
583:
582:
581:
576:
571:
564:
561:
552:
551:
543:
540:
522:
519:
514:
511:
509:
506:
505:
504:
500:
497:
494:
491:
487:
482:
479:
473:
470:
465:
462:
452:
449:
439:
436:
431:
428:
426:
425:Legal analysis
423:
418:
415:
405:
402:
396:
393:
352:
349:
347:
344:
343:
342:
339:
336:
333:
330:
327:
322:
319:
270:
269:
255:
254:
250:
249:
246:
242:
241:
238:
234:
233:
230:
229:Concur/dissent
226:
225:
222:
218:
217:
214:
210:
209:
205:
204:
203:
202:
200:Stephen Breyer
168:Antonin Scalia
153:
150:
145:
139:
138:
134:
133:
125:
124:
120:
119:
102:
98:
97:
93:
92:
77:
61:
57:
56:
51:
50:Full case name
47:
46:
40:
39:
34:
26:
25:
17:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2664:
2653:
2650:
2648:
2645:
2643:
2640:
2638:
2635:
2633:
2630:
2628:
2625:
2623:
2620:
2618:
2615:
2614:
2612:
2592:
2591:
2587:
2584:
2583:
2579:
2576:
2575:
2571:
2568:
2567:
2563:
2560:
2559:
2555:
2552:
2551:
2547:
2544:
2543:
2539:
2536:
2535:
2531:
2528:
2527:
2523:
2520:
2519:
2515:
2512:
2511:
2507:
2504:
2503:
2499:
2496:
2495:
2491:
2488:
2487:
2483:
2480:
2479:
2475:
2472:
2471:
2467:
2464:
2463:
2459:
2456:
2455:
2451:
2448:
2447:
2443:
2440:
2439:
2435:
2432:
2431:
2427:
2424:
2423:
2419:
2416:
2415:
2411:
2408:
2407:
2403:
2400:
2399:
2395:
2392:
2391:
2387:
2384:
2383:
2379:
2376:
2375:
2371:
2368:
2367:
2363:
2360:
2359:
2355:
2352:
2351:
2347:
2344:
2343:
2339:
2336:
2335:
2331:
2328:
2327:
2323:
2320:
2319:
2315:
2312:
2311:
2307:
2304:
2303:
2299:
2296:
2295:
2291:
2288:
2287:
2283:
2280:
2279:
2275:
2272:
2271:
2267:
2264:
2263:
2259:
2256:
2255:
2251:
2248:
2247:
2243:
2240:
2239:
2235:
2232:
2231:
2227:
2224:
2223:
2219:
2216:
2215:
2211:
2208:
2207:
2203:
2200:
2199:
2195:
2192:
2191:
2187:
2184:
2183:
2179:
2176:
2175:
2171:
2168:
2167:
2163:
2160:
2159:
2155:
2152:
2151:
2147:
2144:
2143:
2139:
2136:
2135:
2131:
2128:
2127:
2123:
2120:
2119:
2115:
2112:
2111:
2107:
2104:
2103:
2099:
2096:
2095:
2091:
2090:
2087:
2083:
2078:
2074:
2063:
2062:
2058:
2055:
2054:
2050:
2047:
2046:
2042:
2039:
2038:
2034:
2031:
2030:
2026:
2023:
2022:
2018:
2015:
2014:
2010:
2007:
2006:
2002:
1999:
1998:
1997:Nguyen v. INS
1994:
1991:
1990:
1986:
1983:
1982:
1978:
1975:
1974:
1970:
1967:
1966:
1962:
1959:
1958:
1954:
1951:
1950:
1946:
1943:
1942:
1938:
1935:
1934:
1930:
1927:
1926:
1922:
1919:
1918:
1914:
1911:
1910:
1906:
1903:
1902:
1898:
1895:
1894:
1890:
1887:
1886:
1882:
1879:
1878:
1874:
1871:
1870:
1866:
1863:
1862:
1858:
1855:
1854:
1850:
1847:
1846:
1842:
1839:
1838:
1834:
1831:
1830:
1826:
1823:
1822:
1818:
1815:
1814:
1810:
1807:
1806:
1802:
1799:
1798:
1794:
1791:
1790:
1786:
1783:
1782:
1778:
1775:
1774:
1770:
1767:
1766:
1762:
1759:
1758:
1754:
1751:
1750:
1746:
1743:
1742:
1738:
1735:
1734:
1730:
1727:
1726:
1722:
1719:
1718:
1714:
1711:
1710:
1706:
1703:
1702:
1698:
1695:
1694:
1690:
1687:
1686:
1682:
1681:
1678:
1674:
1669:
1665:
1648:
1647:
1646:Vega v. Tekoh
1643:
1640:
1639:
1635:
1632:
1631:
1627:
1624:
1623:
1619:
1616:
1615:
1611:
1608:
1607:
1603:
1600:
1599:
1595:
1592:
1591:
1587:
1584:
1583:
1579:
1576:
1575:
1571:
1568:
1567:
1563:
1560:
1559:
1555:
1552:
1551:
1547:
1544:
1543:
1539:
1536:
1535:
1531:
1528:
1527:
1523:
1520:
1519:
1515:
1512:
1511:
1507:
1504:
1503:
1499:
1496:
1495:
1491:
1488:
1487:
1483:
1480:
1479:
1475:
1472:
1471:
1467:
1464:
1463:
1459:
1456:
1455:
1451:
1448:
1447:
1443:
1440:
1439:
1435:
1434:
1431:
1427:
1422:
1418:
1403:
1402:
1398:
1395:
1394:
1390:
1387:
1386:
1382:
1379:
1378:
1374:
1371:
1370:
1366:
1363:
1362:
1358:
1357:
1355:
1351:
1344:
1343:
1339:
1336:
1335:
1331:
1328:
1327:
1323:
1320:
1319:
1315:
1312:
1311:
1307:
1304:
1303:
1299:
1296:
1295:
1291:
1288:
1287:
1283:
1280:
1279:
1275:
1274:
1272:
1268:
1261:
1260:
1256:
1255:
1253:
1249:
1242:
1241:
1237:
1234:
1233:
1229:
1226:
1225:
1221:
1218:
1217:
1213:
1210:
1209:
1205:
1204:
1202:
1198:
1191:
1190:
1186:
1183:
1182:
1178:
1175:
1174:
1170:
1167:
1166:
1162:
1159:
1158:
1154:
1151:
1150:
1146:
1145:
1143:
1139:
1132:
1131:
1127:
1124:
1123:
1119:
1116:
1115:
1111:
1108:
1107:
1103:
1100:
1099:
1095:
1092:
1091:
1087:
1084:
1083:
1079:
1076:
1075:
1071:
1068:
1067:
1063:
1062:
1060:
1056:
1049:
1048:
1044:
1041:
1040:
1036:
1033:
1032:
1028:
1025:
1024:
1020:
1019:
1017:
1013:
1009:
1005:
1000:
996:
985:
984:
980:
977:
976:
972:
969:
968:
964:
961:
960:
956:
953:
952:
948:
945:
944:
943:Ex parte Bain
940:
937:
936:
932:
931:
928:
923:
918:
914:
909:
906:
899:
894:
892:
887:
885:
880:
879:
876:
870:
865:
858:
853:
851:
846:
844:
839:
838:
835:
826:
817:
808:
799:
790:
781:
780:CourtListener
772:
765:
761:
757:
753:
752:
748:
740:
735:
731:
726:
723:
719:
714:
708:
705:
701:
698:
694:
690:
689:
683:
680:
676:
673:
669:
665:
664:
658:
655:
651:
648:
644:
640:
639:
633:
631:
627:
624:
622:
611: (1998).
610:
607:
603:
599:
594:
591:
584:
580:
577:
575:
572:
570:
567:
566:
562:
560:
558:
549:
546:
545:
541:
539:
536:
535:
530:
529:
520:
518:
512:
507:
501:
498:
495:
492:
488:
485:
484:
480:
478:
471:
469:
463:
461:
458:
450:
448:
445:
437:
435:
429:
424:
422:
416:
414:
412:
404:Prior history
403:
401:
395:Facts of case
394:
392:
390:
386:
385:ex post facto
381:
377:
376:
371:
367:
363:
359:
350:
345:
340:
337:
334:
331:
328:
325:
324:
320:
318:
316:
315:ex post facto
312:
307:
303:
302:
297:
296:
290:
286:
282:
278:
277:
268:
264:
260:
256:
251:
247:
243:
239:
235:
231:
227:
223:
219:
215:
211:
208:Case opinions
206:
201:
197:
193:
189:
185:
181:
177:
173:
169:
165:
161:
157:
154:
151:
149:
146:
144:Chief Justice
143:
142:
140:
135:
131:
126:
121:
117:
113:
110:
106:
103:
99:
94:
89:
85:
81:
75:
74:
69:
66:
62:
58:
55:
52:
48:
41:
37:
27:
22:
16:
2588:
2580:
2572:
2564:
2556:
2548:
2540:
2532:
2524:
2516:
2508:
2500:
2492:
2484:
2476:
2468:
2460:
2452:
2445:
2444:
2436:
2428:
2420:
2412:
2404:
2396:
2388:
2380:
2372:
2364:
2356:
2348:
2340:
2332:
2324:
2316:
2308:
2300:
2292:
2284:
2276:
2268:
2260:
2252:
2244:
2236:
2228:
2220:
2212:
2204:
2196:
2188:
2180:
2172:
2164:
2156:
2148:
2140:
2132:
2124:
2116:
2108:
2100:
2092:
2059:
2051:
2043:
2035:
2029:Kerry v. Din
2027:
2019:
2011:
2003:
1995:
1987:
1979:
1971:
1963:
1955:
1947:
1939:
1931:
1923:
1915:
1907:
1899:
1891:
1883:
1875:
1867:
1859:
1851:
1843:
1835:
1827:
1819:
1811:
1803:
1795:
1787:
1779:
1771:
1763:
1755:
1747:
1739:
1731:
1723:
1715:
1707:
1699:
1691:
1683:
1644:
1636:
1628:
1620:
1612:
1604:
1596:
1588:
1580:
1572:
1564:
1556:
1548:
1540:
1532:
1524:
1516:
1508:
1500:
1492:
1484:
1476:
1468:
1460:
1452:
1444:
1436:
1399:
1391:
1383:
1375:
1367:
1359:
1340:
1332:
1324:
1316:
1308:
1300:
1292:
1284:
1276:
1257:
1238:
1230:
1222:
1214:
1206:
1187:
1179:
1171:
1163:
1155:
1147:
1128:
1120:
1112:
1104:
1096:
1088:
1080:
1072:
1064:
1045:
1037:
1029:
1021:
981:
973:
965:
957:
949:
941:
933:
755:
733:
729:
725:
712:
707:
702: (1960).
686:
682:
677: (1905).
661:
657:
652: (1978).
636:
618:
597:
593:
553:
532:
526:
524:
516:
475:
467:
457:Penn Central
456:
454:
444:Penn Central
443:
441:
433:
420:
407:
398:
389:Penn Central
388:
373:
362:Penn Central
361:
358:Penn Central
357:
354:
351:State of law
338:Amici Curiae
299:
293:
275:
274:
273:
253:Laws applied
195:
183:
180:David Souter
171:
159:
104:
96:Case history
71:
53:
15:
451:Rule of law
380:due process
221:Concurrence
2611:Categories
922:Grand Jury
585:References
346:Background
317:theories.
84:U.S. LEXIS
82:451; 1998
472:Reasoning
213:Plurality
80:L. Ed. 2d
60:Citations
910:case law
866:case law
754:Text of
563:See also
116:1st Cir.
789:Findlaw
771:Cornell
464:Holding
321:Parties
245:Dissent
237:Dissent
232:Kennedy
123:Holding
2593:(2024)
2585:(2024)
2577:(2023)
2569:(2021)
2561:(2021)
2553:(2019)
2545:(2017)
2537:(2015)
2529:(2013)
2521:(2013)
2513:(2012)
2505:(2010)
2497:(2005)
2489:(2005)
2481:(2005)
2473:(2003)
2465:(2002)
2457:(2001)
2449:(1998)
2441:(1998)
2433:(1997)
2425:(1997)
2417:(1994)
2409:(1992)
2401:(1992)
2393:(1990)
2385:(1988)
2377:(1987)
2369:(1987)
2361:(1987)
2353:(1987)
2345:(1985)
2337:(1985)
2329:(1984)
2321:(1984)
2313:(1982)
2305:(1980)
2297:(1980)
2289:(1979)
2281:(1978)
2273:(1960)
2265:(1958)
2257:(1956)
2249:(1954)
2241:(1951)
2233:(1949)
2225:(1946)
2217:(1945)
2209:(1935)
2201:(1929)
2193:(1923)
2185:(1923)
2177:(1922)
2169:(1921)
2161:(1917)
2153:(1913)
2145:(1897)
2137:(1893)
2129:(1885)
2121:(1885)
2113:(1884)
2105:(1875)
2097:(1833)
2064:(2024)
2056:(2022)
2048:(2020)
2040:(2017)
2032:(2015)
2024:(2013)
2016:(2011)
2008:(2001)
2000:(2001)
1992:(1998)
1984:(1995)
1976:(1990)
1968:(1987)
1960:(1986)
1952:(1984)
1944:(1981)
1936:(1980)
1928:(1980)
1920:(1980)
1912:(1979)
1904:(1979)
1896:(1979)
1888:(1978)
1880:(1977)
1872:(1977)
1864:(1977)
1856:(1977)
1848:(1976)
1840:(1976)
1832:(1976)
1824:(1976)
1816:(1976)
1808:(1976)
1800:(1975)
1792:(1975)
1784:(1974)
1776:(1973)
1768:(1973)
1760:(1972)
1752:(1971)
1744:(1964)
1736:(1954)
1728:(1938)
1720:(1935)
1712:(1927)
1704:(1923)
1696:(1908)
1688:(1857)
1649:(2022)
1641:(2013)
1633:(2012)
1625:(2011)
1617:(2011)
1609:(2010)
1601:(2010)
1593:(2010)
1585:(2009)
1577:(2004)
1569:(2004)
1561:(2004)
1553:(2003)
1545:(2000)
1537:(2000)
1529:(1999)
1521:(1991)
1513:(1990)
1505:(1988)
1497:(1985)
1489:(1981)
1481:(1974)
1473:(1970)
1465:(1969)
1457:(1966)
1449:(1965)
1441:(1957)
1404:(1969)
1396:(1969)
1388:(1966)
1380:(1947)
1372:(1937)
1364:(1885)
1345:(2022)
1337:(2019)
1329:(2016)
1321:(2004)
1313:(1985)
1305:(1978)
1297:(1970)
1289:(1959)
1281:(1922)
1262:(1932)
1243:(2012)
1235:(1982)
1227:(1976)
1219:(1971)
1211:(1824)
1192:(2023)
1184:(1993)
1176:(1992)
1168:(1990)
1160:(1976)
1152:(1833)
1133:(2024)
1125:(2016)
1117:(2013)
1109:(1978)
1101:(1970)
1093:(1962)
1085:(1906)
1077:(1896)
1069:(1834)
1050:(1993)
1042:(1992)
1034:(1990)
1026:(1932)
986:(2002)
978:(1962)
970:(1922)
962:(1900)
954:(1896)
946:(1887)
938:(1884)
924:Clause
828:
822:
819:
813:
810:
807:Justia
804:
801:
795:
792:
786:
783:
777:
774:
768:
737:,
716:,
700:40, 49
691:,
666:,
641:,
617:
600:,
508:Result
224:Thomas
198:
196:·
194:
186:
184:·
182:
174:
172:·
170:
162:
160:·
158:
130:taking
118:1997).
107:, 110
1353:Other
762:
695:
670:
645:
604:
430:Issue
101:Prior
764:U.S.
697:U.S.
672:U.S.
647:U.S.
606:U.S.
383:the
109:F.3d
73:more
65:U.S.
63:524
760:524
730:See
693:364
668:198
650:104
643:438
609:498
602:524
313:or
263:XIV
112:150
88:BNA
68:498
2613::
758:,
675:45
629:^
265:;
261:,
897:e
890:t
883:v
856:e
849:t
842:v
623:.
114:(
76:)
70:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.