Today in Supreme Court History: March 21, 1989

3/21/1989: Texas v. Johnson is argued.

Comments

[Dan Schiavetta]

A Book Named “John Cleland’s Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure” v. Massachusetts, 383 U.S. 413 (decided March 21, 1966): The book is more widely known as “Fanny Hill”, written in 1749, a hot property when I was a teenager, made into a movie which I saw years later and was a disappointment. Massachusetts brought a civil suit to have the book declared “obscene” under statute construed as anything not Constitutionally protected. Lower court did not apply the test of Roth, 1957 (no redeeming social value, catering only to prurient interest, etc.), so remanded. Meaning the trial judge would be forced to read the thing. Not sure how this turned out.

Manuel v. City of Joliet. Ill., 580 U.S. 357 (decided March 21, 2017): pretrial detention can be a separate unlawful “seizure” under Fourth Amendment (even though well after arrest) (defendant kept in jail even after testing showed seized pills contained no illegal substance)

Caetano v. Massachusetts, 577 U.S. 411 (decided March 21, 2016): Stun guns protected by Second Amendment even though not in existence when Bill of Rights adopted and no military use. Ouch!

San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1 (decided March 21, 1973): state’s system of financing of schools via property taxes (i.e., children in poor areas get worse education) was not Equal Protection violation (poor people are not a protected class)

Missouri v. Frye, 566 U.S. 134 (decided March 21, 2012): ineffective assistance of counsel when defendant not advised of plea offer before it expired

United States v. Grubbs, 547 U.S. 90 (decided March 21, 2006): upholding “anticipatory search warrants” (i.e., based on probable cause of future illegal activity) (here, possession of child pornography in package about to be delivered)

Kenyeres v. Ashcroft, 538 U.S. 1301 (decided March 21, 2003): denying stay of removal of Hungarian citizen wanted for embezzlement in his home country and who had overstayed his visa (Kenyeres stole $1.6 million from investors in Madoff-style scheme)

FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 529 U.S. 120 (decided March 21, 2000): FDA overstepped when it tried to ban tobacco products; invaded field Congress had occupied via its legislation as to labeling and advertising

Adams Fruit Co. v. Barrett, 494 U.S. 638 (decided March 21, 1990): migrants injured in unsafe van on way to work could sue under Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act despite usual worker’s comp ban (IOW: the “dual capacity” doctrine, where employee can’t sue his employer even for non-employer acts, can be superseded by Congress)

Brower v. County of Inyo, 489 U.S. 593 (decided March 21, 1989): a roadblock can be an unreasonable “seizure” and therefore possibly in violation of Fourth Amendment (driving stolen car in high-speed chase, died when crashed into 18-wheeler placed by police; widow sued under §1983)

[John F. Carr]

I feel like the Supreme Judicial Court took Caetano v. Massachusetts seriously and made a good faith attempt to follow Supreme Court Second Amendment precedent in the years since.

[Dan Schiavetta]

Even though post-Heller the Court has changed its 2A jurisprudence several times. For example, Heller said that bans on concealed carry were acceptable.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

The Supreme Court handed down two opinions today.

Gorsuch (joined with Jackson) dissented from the one written by Thomas. The dissent starts in a conversational tone. You can easily imagine Gorsuch's voice when reading it.

CNN: Retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer described Chief Justice John Roberts' statement rebuking President Donald Trump's call for the impeachment of US District Judge James Boasberg as 'informative and educational,' explaining the appropriate appeals process.

Judge VanDyke released a video of himself disassembling guns in chambers as part of a dissent against an appellate court ruling. Thomas once provided. .gifs in his opinion. A few times, a video was provided, if not a self-created one.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/media/media.aspx

[David Nieporent]

I was sure the petitioner would lose the first case when he tried to argue at oral arguments that poisoning someone wasn't a crime of violence.

As for the unanimous decision in Thompson, I didn't think he had any chance of prevailing. And he doesn't; technically he won because the Court found that the lower courts had misinterpreted the statute, but on reman they're going to find that he's guilty even under the proper interpretation.

[John F. Carr]

Based on skimming the opinions, I am with the Gorsuch and Jackson dissent.

The "crime of violence" statutes need to be replaced. The federal firearm enhancements could just be repealed.

[John F. Carr]

In the false statements case, I think the evidence is strong enough to distinguish it from Bronston v. United States, which I generally approve of.

[David Nieporent]

[Moved]