Today in Supreme Court History: April 2, 1980

4/2/1980: Justice Stanley Forman Reed dies.

Justice Stanley Forman Reed

Comments

[Dan Schiavetta]

Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy Corp., 549 U.S. 561 (decided April 2, 2007): “modification” can mean different things in different (complicated) environmental statutes; the upshot was that coal-fired plant should have gotten a permit before upgrading

Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of City of Burlington, 566 U.S. 318 (decided April 2, 2012): strip search upon incarceration is not unreasonable under Fourth Amendment

Encino Motorcars v. Navarro, 584 U.S. 79 (decided April 2, 2018): the guy at the auto dealership who tells you about service contract options doesn’t have to be paid overtime -- he’s one of those people “servicing” autos who is exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act

Kisela v. Hughes, 584 U.S. 100 (decided April 2, 2018): shooting plaintiff who was holding a knife over another woman and wouldn’t drop it does not violate “clearly established law” and therefore qualified immunity; §1983 allegation of excessive force dismissed

McCutcheon v. Federal Election Comm’n, 572 U.S. 185 (decided April 2, 2014): statutory limit on total amount one person can donate to political candidates/committees violates First Amendment; 5 - 4 decision

Northwest, Inc. v. Ginsberg, 572 U.S. 273 (decided April 2, 2014): extra-contractual claim against airline which revoked frequent flyer status (misrepresentation, breach of good faith and fair dealing) preempted by Airline Deregulation Act

De La Rama v. De La Rama, 201 U.S. 303 (decided April 2, 1906): upholding Philippine divorce verdict; wife established adultery by proof that husband abandoned her and shacked up with three women, getting them all pregnant (I would say the wife made out her case)

Rehberg v. Paulk, 566 U.S. 356 (decided April 2, 2012): grand jury witness who allegedly fabricated evidence can’t be sued for damages under §1983; enjoyed same immunity as trial witness (can’t blame the accused for trying to sue; grand jury had returned three indictments, all of them dismissed for insufficiency of evidence)

Texas v. Cobb, 532 U.S. 162 (decided April 2, 2001): no deprivation of right to counsel when defendant charged with one crime (burglary) confesses to separate uncharged crime (murder of the occupants); 5 - 4 decision

United States v. Caceres, 440 U.S. 741 (decided April 2, 1979): conversation with IRS agent admissible in bribery trial even though recorded in violation of IRS protocols

[A Japanese Student]

Detaining someone for one offense, for the purpose of obtaining confessions for uncharged offenses, is a regular practice in Japan. Constitutional right to counsel, or the prohibition of self-incrimination, does not bar the police from interrogating someone - under prevailing theory, the defendant cannot refuse interviews. They can plead the Fifth (or, I suppose, the Thirty-eighth), refuse to sign the written statement of confession (prepared by the police), and sometimes contact their counsel waiting in another room.

[A Japanese Student]

I'm not in a position to comment on US campaign finance (cf. Bluman v. FEC, 800 F. Supp. 2d 281 (D.D.C. 2011).) In Japan, campaign finance is regulated primarily under the Political Funds Control Act. Last year they amended it three times, in response to the slush fund crisis. Here is the translated version of official contribution limit information: https://imgur.com/a/7CdYPNs

There are two actors specific to Japanese law: Party Treasury Organization (which is utilized mostly by LDP), and Candidate Treasury Organization (which each candidate manages). Individuals usually donate money either to local party branches or CTOs. CTOs can engage in political expenditure themselves, or act as a war chest that can provide money to individual politicians once an election is called.

[Dan Schiavetta]

I heard Josh (briefly) on NPR yesterday. He was one of three legal experts being interviewed about Trump's DOJ lawyers going into court unprepared and being the last to know about things (for example, that flight to El Salvador). He got in only two sentences but they were unexceptionable remarks about how the DOJ is decimated by resignations and cuts and how the lawyers there are doing the best they can. I'm sure he told the reporter more than that but that's all they put in.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

He was right about Barrett having MEDICAL MARIJUANA, INC., ET AL. v. HORN. Holding: "Under civil RICO, §1964(c), a plaintiff may seek treble damages for business or property loss even if the loss resulted from a personal injury."

Interesting split. Gorsuch along with the liberals joined & that means it was a relatively rare Roberts dissent. Thomas (alone) and Kavanaugh (Roberts, Alito) dissented.

Jackson added a paragraph to further her "When Congress speaks, courts should listen" mantra.

[Noscitur a sociis]

Already added to the CV, I’m sure.

[F.D. Wolf]

On this day, April 2, 1917, President Woodrow Wilson addressed a joint session of Congress, asking for a declaration of war against Germany. The Senate would pass a war resolution that same day by a vote of 82-6. The House would follow suit at 3 AM on April 6, by a vote of 373-50. Wilson would sign the resolution that same day, and the United States officially entered World War I.

One of the fifty members of the House to vote against the war resolution was Jeannette Rankin (R-MT), who had one month earlier entered office as the first female member of Congress. Rankin did not seek re-election to her House seat in 1918, choosing instead to run for the Senate. She lost the GOP primary, but accepted the nomination of the National Party, ultimately finishing third in the general election. Rankin would return to the House, winning election in 1940 at the age of 60. On December 8, 1941, she was the only member of Congress to vote against the declaration of war against Japan. Three days later, she abstained from the vote for a declaration of war against Germany, which passed both houses of Congress unanimously. The vote essentially killed her political career, and she did not seek re-election in 1942.

Rankin was (unsurprisingly) a fierce opponent if the Vietnam War and considered a third run for the House in 1972, at the age of 92, but ultimately decided against it. She would pass away on May 18, 1973. She is chiefly remembered today for her pacifism, but when addressing the Montana Constitutional Convention in 1972, she said, "If I am remembered for no other act, I want to be remembered as the only woman who ever voted to give women the right to vote."

[Syd Henderson]

Clearly her election to Congress was a major cause of the US entering both world wars. Good thing she didn't run again or we would have had World War III (which she would have voted against).

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Stanley Forman Reed, like John Paul Stevens, died in his 90s.

As solicitor general, he argued many important cases defending FDR's policies. Robert Jackson replaced him as S.G.

Reed replaced Justice George Sutherland. Reed was in the moderate/conservative wing of the FDR/Truman nominees on certain civil liberty issues. For instance, he was the sole dissenter in Illinois ex rel. McCollum v. Board of Education regarding religious education in public schools. Vashti McCollum wrote an interesting account of her role in the dispute.

Reed was from Kentucky & was wary of voting with the majority in Brown v. Bd. The usual accounts have CJ Warren saying in effect "it's up to you now, you don't want to be all alone, do you?" Reed did join various other racial equality rulings.

He retired at 73 for reasons of age but lived for over twenty more years. Still, he was frail in his final years, and it was a good choice to retire when he did.

Reed's replacement, Charles Whittaker, was a bit of a dud.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

The second case decided day was a fairly long opinion by Justice Alito for a unanimous court (Sotomayor added a short concurrence) reversing the Fifth Circuit in an e-cigs dispute.