Today in Supreme Court History: May 30, 1865

5/30/1865: Justice John Catron dies.

Justice John Catron

 

Comments

[Dan Schiavetta]

BNSF Ry. Co. v. Tyrrell, 581 U.S. 402 (decided May 30, 2017): railroad could be sued in state where it was neither based nor incorporated nor where accident happened (IOW, under general “doing business” jurisdiction as allowed by state statute) despite Daimler AG v. Bauman, 2014, which held that “doing business” jurisdiction did not comport with due process, because 45 U.S.C. §56 allows suit against railroads in any “doing business” state which is only a venue and not a jurisdictional phrase (this is lame; I think the Court was trying to put a diaper on Daimler)

County of Los Angeles v. Mendez, 581 U.S. 420 (decided May 30, 2017): reasonable force as a result of intentionally/recklessly provoking a violent confrontation (in violation of Fourth Amendment) is not “unreasonable use of force” so as to void qualified immunity (police improperly broke in without warrant and woke up defendant, who thinking it was his girlfriend, moved his rat-hunting BB gun off the bed so that he could get up; police shot him multiple times) (does this decision sound right to you?)

Esquivel-Quintana v. Sessions, 581 U.S. 385 (decided May 30, 2017): “sexual abuse of minor” (a reason for deportation under the Immigration Act) presumes general federal law definition of minor (under age 16) rather than law of State of conviction (18) and therefore deportation order based on guilty plea as to 17-year-old girl overturned

Hildwin v. Florida, 490 U.S. 638 (decided May 30, 1989): Sixth Amendment (trial by jury) does not require that, after conviction, findings of fact authorizing death penalty be made by jury; judge can decide sentence after hearing jury’s mere recommendations and is not bound by them (overruled by Hurst v. Florida, 2016)

Deepsouth Packing Co. v. Laitram Corp., 406 U.S. 518 (decided May 30, 1972): it is not a patent infringement to sell parts of a patented invention (a shrimp deveining machine) to overseas buyers for assembly (abrogated by statute in 1984) (note White’s flowery language which shows that as a writer he was a good football player)

Socialist Labor Party v. Gilligan, 406 U.S. 583 (decided May 30, 1972): no “case or controversy” as to contention by political party that Ohio’s requiring loyalty oath for placement on ballot violated Equal Protection because of intervening change in election law, failure to allege injury or actual exclusion from ballot, and fact that party had repeatedly signed the oath in the past

In re Primus, 436 U.S. 412 (decided May 30, 1978): ACLU attorney who had given lecture to women who had been involuntarily sterilized and then sent letter stating that the ACLU would offer free legal assistance was protected by First/Fourteenth Amendment freedom of expression; disciplinary reprimand for “solicitation” vacated

Raleigh v. Illinois Dept. of Revenue, 530 U.S. 15 (decided May 30, 2000): bankruptcy does not change burden of proof, and state law provides rule for state law claims (here, Illinois law held that burden of proof as to whether tax is owed by debtor is on the debtor/bankruptcy trustee)

Bernal v. Fainter, 467 U.S. 216 (decided May 30, 1984): Texas requirement that a notary be a United States citizen violated Equal Protection under strict scrutiny (no “compelling state interest” — plaintiff was a resident alien)

Burns v. Reed, 500 U.S. 478 (decided May 30, 1991): prosecutor who obtained search warrant after advising police officers to question multiple-personality defendant under hypnosis (one of her other personalities was suspected of shooting her children) enjoyed prosecutorial immunity in 42 U.S.C. §1983 suit as to conduct at probable cause hearing but not as to advice to police (one of the personalities had been the one to make the initial call after the shooting) (it’s unclear which of the personalities brought the §1983 suit — how many “plaintiffs” had to be deposed?)

[apedad]

County of Los Angeles v. Mendez (does this decision sound right to you?)

It was an 8 - 0 decision (Gorsuch out), where the Court determined that since there were potentially multiple 4A issues (no initial warrant, provocation rule), " . . . the lower court erroneously conflated distinct Fourth Amendment claims," and if, "the defendant has multiple Fourth Amendment violation claims, they should each be analyzed separately."

So, it seems the defendant should have addressed the initial warrantless search first.

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2016/16-369

[Dan Schiavetta]

Sounds like the defendant argued properly but the mistake in analysis was made by the Circuit Court.

On remand the Circuit Court did restore the verdict on damages, holding that the reach for the BB gun was not a superseding cause which cut off liability, 897 F.3d 1067.

Thanks for this information. Will revise.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

"Esquivel-Quintana v. Sessions, 581 U.S. 385 (decided May 30, 2017): “sexual abuse of minor” (a reason for deportation under the Immigration Act) presumes general federal law definition of minor (under age 16) rather than law of State of conviction (18) and therefore deportation order based on guilty plea as to 17-year-old girl overturned"

Winger would approve.

[F.D. Wolf]

After the death of Justice Catron, President Andrew Johnson nominated his Attorney General Henry Stanberry to succeed him. While the nomination was pending, Congress passed the Judicial Circuits Act, which would reduce the membership of the Court from ten justices to seven as justices left the Court. Johnson signed the Act, effectively nullifying Stanberry's nomination.

Catron died on May 30, 1865. Johnson did not send his nomination of Stanberry to the Senate until April 16 of the following year, a delay of nearly eleven months. If Johnson had acted with a little more dispatch, he most probably could have secured the appointment. Why did he wait so long? Who knows, but, frankly, Johnson was a pretty terrible President.

While the relationship between Johnson and Congress eventually deteriorated into complete animosity, naturally, it did not begin that way. Johnson had become president, of course, upon the death of President Lincoln on April 15, 1865. Justice Catron died 45 days later. (In fact, Congress was not even in session when Lincoln died and would not convene until December, so Johnson could have made a recess appointment, though that would have definitely gotten his relationship with Congress started on the wrong foot.)

Johnson's last chance to appoint a justice probably disappeared on April 3, 1866, when the Supreme Court decided Ex parte Milligan, in which it held that civilians could not be tried by military tribunals in areas where civilian courts were open and functioning. The Radical Republicans viewed this as a serious attack on Reconstruction and decided to tighten their control on the Supreme Court and the judiciary in general.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

“frankly, Johnson was a pretty terrible President”

Johnson by name, Johnson by nature.

Americans haven't been very lucky with their Johnsons.

[Syd Henderson]

Orson Welles did a movie about that, called "Too Much Johnson."

[The Margrave of Azilia]

True fact*: The authorized merchandise for that movie was sold by the Big Johnson T-shirt company.

*Not a true fact.