Today in Supreme Court History: May 16, 1918

5/16/1918: The Sedition Act of 1918 is enacted. The Supreme Court upheld prosecutions brought under this law in Schenck, Debs, and Abrams.

Comments

[Dan Schiavetta]

California v. Greenwood, 486 U.S. 35 (decided May 16, 1988): police can search garbage left out by the curb without a warrant

Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Hillmon, 145 U.S. 285 (decided May 16, 1892): This is the famous case which dragged on for 24 years, and this was the decision which made it famous, introducing a new rule of evidence, the hearsay exception for future intention. Sallie Hillmon tried to collect on life insurance policies, by proving that her husband had died by accidental gunshot at Crooked Creek, Kansas in 1879. Was the deceased John Hillmon or one Fred Walters? Here, the Court holds that the trial court should have admitted a letter written at Wichita from Walters to his financeé stating that he intended to go to Colorado with his new buddy Hillmon; this might show that it was really Walters who was shot because Crooked Creek was along the way and Walters, an assiduous letter writer, was never heard from again. My Evidence professor did his usual excellent job recounting this story, ending with, “To this day, nobody knows who was shot at Crooked Creek”, but Wikipedia reports on a 2006 exhumation which concluded that it probably was indeed Hillmon. Anyway, Sallie was paid off and after one final 1903 decision remanding for a seventh trial the remaining insurers settled with each other.

United States v. Winans, 198 U.S. 371 (decided May 16, 1905): State of Washington must respect fishing rights granted to Native Americans under treaty made with federal government when Washington was a territory

Lawrence v. State Tax Comm'n of Mississippi, 286 U.S. 276 (decided May 16, 1932): a state supreme court court can't evade United States Supreme Court review by basing its decision on state law grounds that are insubstantial and illusory after a party has properly raised a federal issue (the issue was whether state taxation on income from activities out of state is consistent with Equal Protection)

Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 578 U.S. 330 (decided May 16, 2016): Fair Credit Reporting Act suit citing incorrect information as to plaintiff on credit reporting agency web site did not allege “concrete injury” and therefore was not a “case or controversy” sufficient to invoke Article III jurisdiction

Kentucky v. King, 563 U.S. 452 (decided May 16, 2011): “exigent circumstances to prevent destruction of evidence” exception to warrant requirement applied when police officers, having knocked on door, broke it down after hearing noises of frantic movement as if to hide things

Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (decided May 16, 1983): attorney in civil rights case (involving treatment during involuntary hospitalization) prevailing on most but not all claims is entitled to recoup fees spent in pursing related though unsuccessful claims but not fees as to factually unrelated claims

Beecham v. United States, 511 U.S. 368 (decided May 16, 1994): ex-felon still bound by federal post-conviction restriction on ownership of firearm even though restriction due to state law conviction had been lifted

Hill v. United States, 50 U.S. 386 (decided May 16, 1850): judgment debtors in suit brought by the United States (for failure to pay a promissory note) are barred by sovereign immunity from moving to enjoin enforcement

Amis v. Myers, 57 U.S. 492 (decided May 16, 1854): in executing a judgment one cannot force the sale of the debtor's slaves

[John F. Carr]

Correction to Amis v. Myers from last year's thread: "slaves cannot be sold as part of executing judgment because slaves did not belong to debtor".

[Dan Schiavetta]

Sorry! I missed that one.

[SRG]

In Spokeo, at the second go-around, Robins proved concrete injury, Spokeo appealed to Supreme Court again but this time, cert denied.

[Dan Schiavetta]

Thanks!

[David Nieporent]

Yet another example of how the Supreme Court establishes law; it doesn't decide cases. (See also Orin Kerr repeatedly pointing out that all these defendants who win 4th amendment arguments at SCOTUS end up losing on remand because of the GFE.)

[juris imprudent]

The Debs link goes to Schenk (again).

[The Margrave of Azilia]

The Supreme Court based those decisions on the 1917 Espionage Act, not the 1918 Act.