Runyon v. McCrary, 427 U.S. 160 (1976)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/036-runyon-v-mccrary

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep427/usrep427160/usrep427160.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Michael McCrary and Colin Gonzales, two Black children in Virginia, were turned away by private schools, Bobbe's School and Fairfax-Brewster School, which did not admit Black students. Their parents sued under Section 1981, a Reconstruction-era statute originally enacted in the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which guarantees all persons the same right to make and enforce contracts as is enjoyed by white citizens.

Justice Stewart, for a seven-to-two majority, held that Section 1981 reaches private acts of racial discrimination in making contracts, including a private school's refusal to admit students because of race. The schools' arguments based on freedom of association and parental rights did not save them.

Justices Powell and Stevens concurred while expressing doubts about the earlier precedent they felt bound to follow. Justice White, joined by Justice Rehnquist, dissented, arguing the 1866 Congress meant only to give Black citizens the legal capacity to contract, not to forbid private refusals.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Jones, supra, at 441-443, n. 78 at 441-443, n. 78 [as printed: Jones, supra, at 441-443, n. 78; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stewart)] (episode link pending)

- Tillman v. Wheaton-Haven Recreation Assn., 410 U.S. 431 at 439-440 [as printed: Tillman v. Wheaton-Haven Recreation Assn., 410 U. S. 431, 439-440 (1973); Dissent (Mr. Justice White)] (episode link pending)

- Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, 421 U.S. 454 [as printed: Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, 421 U. S. 454 (1975); Dissent (Mr. Justice White)] (episode link pending)

- NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449 [as printed: NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U. S. 449; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stewart)] episode

- Norwood v. Harrison, 413 U.S. 455 at 469 [as printed: Norwood v. Harrison, 413 U. S. 455, 469; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stewart)] (episode link pending)

- Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 [as printed: Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U. S. 390; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stewart)] (episode link pending)

- Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 [as printed: Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U. S. 510; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stewart)] (episode link pending)

- 534-535. In Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 [as printed: 534-535. In Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U. S. 205; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stewart)] episode

- Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 [as printed: Roe v. Wade, supra; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stewart)] episode

- Holmberg v. Armbrecht, 327 U.S. 392 [as printed: Holmberg, supra; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stewart)] (episode link pending)

(+18 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 142 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/036-runyon-v-mccrary

Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/035-youngstown-sheet-tube-co-v-sawyer

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep343/usrep343579/usrep343579.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

In April 1952, with the Korean War underway and a nationwide steel strike about to begin, President Truman ordered Secretary of Commerce Charles Sawyer to seize and run the nation's steel mills. No statute authorized it. Congress had actually considered and rejected giving the President seizure power in labor disputes. Truman relied on his inherent powers as President and Commander in Chief.

Justice Black, for a six-to-three majority, held the seizure unconstitutional. The President's power must come from an act of Congress or from the Constitution itself, and this order was lawmaking, which belongs to Congress.

Everyone remembers this case, though, for Justice Jackson's concurrence, which sets out three zones of presidential power: when he acts with Congress's authorization, in the twilight zone of congressional silence, and against Congress's will, where his power is at its lowest ebb. Jackson's framework now governs nearly every fight over executive power. Chief Justice Vinson dissented for three justices.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 297 U.S. 288 at 341, 346 [as printed: Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 297 U. S. 288, 341, 346; Concurrence (Mr. Justice Frankfurter)] (episode link pending)

- McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316 at 415 [as printed: McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316, 415 (1819); Concurrence (Mr. Justice Clark)] (episode link pending)

- Hurtado v. California, 110 U.S. 516 at 530 [as printed: Hurtado v. California, 110 U. S. 516, 530; Concurrence (Mr. Justice Frankfurter)] episode

- Springer v. Philippine Islands, 277 U.S. 189 at 209 [as printed: Springer v. Philippine Islands, 277 U. S. 189, 209; Concurrence (Mr. Justice Frankfurter)] episode

- La Abra Silver Mng. Co. v. United States, 175 U.S. 423 [as printed: La Abra Silver Mng. Co. v. United States, 175 U. S. 423; Concurrence (Mr. Justice Frankfurter)] (episode link pending)

- Act. Bus Employees v. Wisconsin Board, 340 U.S. 383 at 396 [as printed: Bus Employees v. Wisconsin Board, 340 U. S. 383, 396; Concurrence (Mr. Justice Burton)] (episode link pending)

- Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52 [as printed: Myers v. United States, supra; Dissent (Mr. Chief Justice Vinson)] episode

- United States v. Midwest Oil Co., 236 U.S. 459 [as printed: United States v. Midwest Oil Co., supra; Dissent (Mr. Chief Justice Vinson)] (episode link pending)

- , supra [as printed: , supra; Dissent (Mr. Chief Justice Vinson)] (episode link pending)

(+20 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 87 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/035-youngstown-sheet-tube-co-v-sawyer

Regents of the Univ. of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/034-regents-of-the-university-of-california-v-bakke

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep438/usrep438265/usrep438265.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

The medical school at the University of California, Davis, set aside sixteen of its one hundred seats each year for minority applicants under a special admissions program. Allan Bakke, a white applicant and former Marine, was rejected twice, though his scores were higher than those of some admitted through the special program. He sued under the Equal Protection Clause and Title Six of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The Court split in a way that produced no majority rationale. Four justices would have struck down the program under Title Six, and four would have upheld it. Justice Powell cast the deciding votes: the quota was unlawful and Bakke must be admitted, but race could be considered as one factor in admissions, in pursuit of a diverse student body.

Powell's solo diversity rationale governed college admissions for forty-five years, until the Court rejected it in Students for Fair Admissions versus Harvard in 2023. Six justices wrote opinions here, so this is a long listen.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- , supra [as printed: , supra; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Powell Me. Justice White. Mr. Justice Marshall. Mr. Justice Blackmun)] (episode link pending)

- Cort v. Ash, 422 U.S. 66 (1975) at 78 [as printed: Cort v. Ash, 422 U. S. 66, 78 (1975); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Powell Me. Justice White. Mr. Justice Marshall. Mr. Justice Blackmun)] (episode link pending)

- McGoldrick v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique, 309 U.S. 430 (1940) at 434 [as printed: McGoldrick v. Compagnie Generate Transatlantique, 309 U. S. 430, 434; Dissent (Me. Justice Stevens)] (episode link pending)

- Title VI. See Lau v. Nichols, 414 U.S. 563 [as printed: Lau v. Nichols, 414 U. S. 563; Dissent (Me. Justice Stevens)] episode

- United States v. American Trucking Assns., 310 U.S. 534 (1940) at 543-544 [as printed: United States v. American Trucking Assns., 310 U. S. 534, 543-544 (1940); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Powell Me. Justice White. Mr. Justice Marshall. Mr. Justice Blackmun)] (episode link pending)

- United States v. Carotene Products Co., 304 U.S. 144 at 152 [as printed: United States v. Carolene Products Co., 304 U. S. 144, 152; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Powell Me. Justice White. Mr. Justice Marshall. Mr. Justice Blackmun)] episode

- Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1 (1948) at 22 [as printed: Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U. S. 1, 22 (1948); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Powell Me. Justice White. Mr. Justice Marshall. Mr. Justice Blackmun)] episode

(+83 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 573 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/034-regents-of-the-university-of-california-v-bakke

Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654 (1988)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/033-morrison-v-olson

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep487/usrep487654/usrep487654.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

The Ethics in Government Act of 1978 created independent counsels, appointed by a special court and removable by the Attorney General only for good cause, to investigate high executive officials. Independent counsel Alexia Morrison was investigating Theodore Olson, a former Assistant Attorney General, over testimony to Congress. Olson argued the whole arrangement violated the separation of powers.

Chief Justice Rehnquist, for a seven-to-one majority, upheld the law. The independent counsel was an inferior officer whom Congress could vest a court with appointing, and the good-cause limit did not unduly interfere with the President's executive power.

Justice Scalia dissented alone, and his dissent is now more influential than the majority. He warned that the law placed prosecutorial power outside the President's control and predicted how it would be used. "This wolf comes as a wolf," he wrote. After the Starr investigation, Congress let the law expire in 1999, and recent cases on presidential removal power lean heavily on Scalia's view.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Sealed Case, 665 F.Supp. 56 (DC) [as printed: Sealed Case, 665 F. Supp. 56 (DC); Opinion of the Court (Chief Justice Rehnquist)] (episode link pending)

- Sealed Case, 267 U.S.App.D.C. 178 (1988) at 224, n. 13 [as printed: Sealed Case, 267 U. S. App. D. C. 178, 224, n. 13, 838 F. 2d 476, 522, n. 13 (1988); Opinion of the Court (Chief Justice Rehnquist)] (episode link pending)

- Blair v. United States, 250 U.S. 273 (1919) [as printed: Blair v. United States, 250 U. S. 273 (1919); Opinion of the Court (Chief Justice Rehnquist)] (episode link pending)

- Sealed Case, 264 U.S.App.D.C. 125 (1987) [as printed: Sealed Case, 264 U. S. App. D. C. 125, 827 F. 2d 776 (1987); Opinion of the Court (Chief Justice Rehnquist)] (episode link pending)

- United States v. Germaine, 99 U.S. 508 (1879) at 511 (discussing United States v. Hartwell, 6 Wall. 385, 393 (1868)) [as printed: United States v. Germaine, 99 U. S. 508, 511 (1879) (discussing United States v. Hartwell, 6 Wall. 385, 393 (1868)); Dissent (Justice Scalia)] (episode link pending)

- Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976) at 140-141 [as printed: Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U. S. 1, 140-141 (1976); Opinion of the Court (Chief Justice Rehnquist)] episode

- Germaine, supra, at 511 at 511 [as printed: Germaine, supra, at 511; Opinion of the Court (Chief Justice Rehnquist)] (episode link pending)

- United States v. Eaton, 169 U.S. 331 (1898) [as printed: States v. Eaton, 169 U. S. 331 (1898); Dissent (Justice Scalia)] (episode link pending)

- Go-Bart Importing Co. v. United States, 282 U.S. 344 (1931) [as printed: Go-Bart Importing Co. v. United States, 282 U. S. 344 (1931); Dissent (Justice Scalia)] (episode link pending)

(+28 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 157 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/033-morrison-v-olson

Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/032-lochner-v-new-york

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep198/usrep198045/usrep198045.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

New York's Bakeshop Act of 1895 limited bakery employees to ten hours a day and sixty hours a week. Joseph Lochner, who owned a bakery in Utica, was convicted of letting an employee work more than sixty hours.

Justice Peckham, for a five-to-four majority, struck down the hours limit as an unreasonable interference with the liberty of contract protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. Baking, he said, was not an unhealthy trade, and the law was really a labor law dressed up as a health law.

Two dissents made the case immortal. Justice Harlan argued the legislature could reasonably believe long hours harmed bakers' health. Justice Holmes wrote that the Fourteenth Amendment does not enact Mr. Herbert Spencer's Social Statics, and that a constitution is not intended to embody a particular economic theory. "Lochnerism" became an insult for judges imposing their own policy views, though some libertarian scholars now argue the decision was right.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Allgeyer v. Louisiana, 165 U.S. 578 at 589 [as printed: Allgeyer v. Louisiana, 165 U. S. 578, 589; Dissent (Mr. Justice Harlan)] episode

- Holden v. Hardy, 169 U.S. 366 at 391 [as printed: Holden v. Hardy, 169 U. S. 366, 391; Dissent (Mr. Justice Harlan)] (episode link pending)

- Atkin v. Kansas, 191 U.S. 207 at 223 [as printed: Atkin v. Kansas, 191 U. S. 207, 223; Dissent (Mr. Justice Harlan)] (episode link pending)

- Knoxville Iron Co. v. Harbison, 183 U.S. 13 at 21, 22 [as printed: Knoxville Iron Co. v. Harbison, 183 U. S. 13, 21, 22; Dissent (Mr. Justice Harlan)] (episode link pending)

- Petit v. Minnesota, 177 U.S. 164 [as printed: Petit v. Minnesota, 177 U. S. 164; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Peckham)] (episode link pending)

- Jacobson v. Massachusetts, supra [as printed: Jacobson v. Massachusetts, supra; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Peckham)] (episode link pending)

- Minnesota v. Barber, 136 U.S. 313 [as printed: Minnesota v. Barber, 136 U. S. 313; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Peckham)] (episode link pending)

- Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356 [as printed: Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U. S. 356; Dissent (Mr. Justice Harlan)] episode

- Patterson v. Kentucky, 97 U.S. 501 [as printed: Patterson v. Kentucky, supra; Dissent (Mr. Justice Harlan)] (episode link pending)

- Barbier v. Connolly, 113 U.S. 27 [as printed: Barbier v. Connolly, 113 U. S. 27; Dissent (Mr. Justice Harlan)] (episode link pending)

- Davidson v. New Orleans, 96 U.S. 97 [as printed: Davidson v. New Orleans, 96 U. S. 97; Dissent (Mr. Justice Harlan)] (episode link pending)

- Lawton v. Steele, 152 U.S. 133 [as printed: Lawton v. Steele, supra; Dissent (Mr. Justice Harlan)] (episode link pending)

(+5 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 17 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/032-lochner-v-new-york

Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/031-planned-parenthood-v-casey

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep505/usrep505833/usrep505833.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Pennsylvania's Abortion Control Act required informed consent and a twenty-four-hour waiting period, parental consent for minors with a judicial bypass, notification of a husband, and reporting rules. With five justices appointed by Presidents Reagan and Bush, many expected Roe versus Wade to fall.

It did not. Justices O'Connor, Kennedy, and Souter wrote an unusual joint opinion that reaffirmed what they called Roe's essential holding, while discarding the trimester framework. In its place they adopted the undue-burden standard: a state may not place a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion before viability. The Court upheld every provision except spousal notification. The joint opinion's long discussion of stare decisis and the Court's legitimacy is its most debated passage.

Justices Blackmun and Stevens wrote separately. Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice Scalia wrote dissents arguing Roe should be overruled, which is what Dobbs did thirty years later.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) [as printed: Roe v. Wade, 410 U. S. 113 (1973); concurring-in-part-and-dissenting-in-part (Justice Scalia)] episode

- Mugler v. Kansas, 123 U.S. 623 (1887) at 660-661 [as printed: Mugler v. Kansas, 123 U. S. 623, 660-661 (1887); Opinion of the Court (Justice O’Connor)] (episode link pending)

- Poe v. Ullman, 367 U.S. 497 (1961) at 541 (Harlan, J., dissenting from dismissal on jurisdictional grounds) [as printed: Poe v. Ullman, 367 U. S. 497, 541 (1961) (Harlan, J., dissenting from dismissal on jurisdictional grounds); Opinion of the Court (Justice O’Connor)] (episode link pending)

- Michael H. v. Gerald D., 491 U.S. 110 (1989) at 122 (plurality opinion) [as printed: Michael H. v. Gerald D., 491 U. S. 110, 122 (1989) (plurality opinion); concurring-in-part-and-dissenting-in-part (ChieF Justice Rehnquist)] (episode link pending)

- Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967) [as printed: Loving v. Virginia, 388 U. S. 1 (1967); concurring-in-part-and-dissenting-in-part (ChieF Justice Rehnquist)] episode

- Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925) [as printed: Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U. S. 510 (1925); concurring-in-part-and-dissenting-in-part (ChieF Justice Rehnquist)] (episode link pending)

- Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965) [as printed: Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U. S. 479 (1965); concurring-in-part-and-dissenting-in-part (ChieF Justice Rehnquist)] episode

(+68 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 575 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/031-planned-parenthood-v-casey

Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/029-wickard-v-filburn

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep317/usrep317111/usrep317111.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Roscoe Filburn ran a small dairy and poultry farm in Ohio. Under the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, his wheat allotment for 1941 was about eleven acres. He planted twenty-three, intending to use much of the wheat on his own farm, to feed his animals and make flour for his family. He was fined under the Act.

Justice Jackson, for a unanimous Court, upheld the penalty. Even if Filburn's own wheat never left the farm, wheat grown for home use reduces what a farmer buys on the market, and taken together with that of many others similarly situated, its effect on interstate commerce is far from trivial.

This aggregation principle became the backbone of the modern Commerce Clause, supporting everything from civil rights laws to drug laws. Critics see it as the moment the limits on federal power effectively disappeared. Lopez, Morrison, Raich, and the health-care case all argue over what Wickard means.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- United States v. Rock Royal Co-operative, 307 U.S. 533 [as printed: United States v. Rock Royal Co-operative, 307 U. S. 533; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Jackson)] (episode link pending)

- United States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100 [as printed: United States v. Darby, 312 U. S. 100; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Jackson)] episode

- Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1 [as printed: Gibbons v. Ogden, supra; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Jackson)] (episode link pending)

- United States v. Knight Co., 156 U.S. 1 [as printed: United States v. Knight Co., supra; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Jackson)] (episode link pending)

- Swift & Co. v. United States, 196 U.S. 375 at 398 [as printed: Swift & Co. v. United States, 196 U. S. 375, 398; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Jackson)] episode

- Shreveport Rate Cases, 234 U.S. 342 [as printed: Shreveport Rate Cases, 234 U. S. 342; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Jackson)] (episode link pending)

- United States v. Wrightwood Dairy Co., 315 U.S. 110 at 119 [as printed: United States v. Wrightwood Dairy Co., 315 U. S. 110, 119; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Jackson)] (episode link pending)

- Carter v. Carter Coal Co., 298 U.S. 238 at 308 [as printed: Carter v. Carter Coal Co., 298 U. S. 238, 308; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Jackson)] episode

- Santa Cruz Co. v. Labor Board, 303 U.S. 453 at 466-467 [as printed: Santa Cruz Co. v. Labor Board, 303 U. S. 453, 466-467; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Jackson)] (episode link pending)

- Stafford v. Wallace, 258 U.S. 495 [as printed: Stafford v. Wallace, 258 U. S. 495; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Jackson)] (episode link pending)

(+10 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 53 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/029-wickard-v-filburn

United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598 (2000)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/028-united-states-v-morrison

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep529/usrep529598/usrep529598.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Christy Brzonkala, a student at Virginia Tech, said two football players, Antonio Morrison and James Crawford, raped her in 1994. A university disciplinary process went nowhere for her in the end, and no criminal charges were brought. She sued under a provision of the Violence Against Women Act that gave victims of gender-motivated violence a federal civil remedy.

Chief Justice Rehnquist, for a five-to-four majority, held that Congress lacked power to enact the provision. Under the Commerce Clause, gender-motivated violence is not economic activity, no matter how large its aggregate effects, and accepting that reasoning would leave nothing reserved to the states. Under Section five of the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress can reach state action, not private conduct.

Justice Thomas concurred to repeat his attack on the substantial-effects test. Justices Souter and Breyer dissented, arguing that Congress had built a mountainous factual record of national economic harm.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1888) [as printed: Civil Rights Cases, 109 U. S. 3 (1883); Dissent (Justice Breyer)] episode

- United States v. Harris, 106 U.S. 629 (1883) [as printed: United States v. Harris, 106 U. S. 629 (1883); Dissent (Justice Breyer)] (episode link pending)

- United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995) [as printed: United States v. Lopez, 514 U. S. 549 (1995); Dissent (Justice Souter)] episode

- Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137 (1803) [as printed: Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137 (1803); Dissent (Justice Souter)] (episode link pending)

- NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U.S. 1 (1937) [as printed: NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U. S. 1 (1937); Dissent (Justice Souter)] episode

- Perez v. United States, 402 U.S. 146 (1971) [as printed: Perez, supra; Opinion of the Court (Chief Justice Rehnquist)] (episode link pending)

- Inc. v. United States, 379 U.S. 241 (1964) (upholding civil rights laws forbidding discrimination at local motels) [as printed: Inc. v. United States, 379 U. S. 241 (1964) (upholding civil rights laws forbidding discrimination at local motels); Dissent (Justice Breyer)] episode

- United States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100 (1941) at 114 [as printed: United States v. Darby, 312 U. S. 100, 114 (1941); Opinion of the Court (Chief Justice Rehnquist)] episode

- Shreveport Rate Cases, 234 U.S. 342 (1914) [as printed: Shreveport Rate Cases, 234 U. S. 342 (1914); Opinion of the Court (Chief Justice Rehnquist)] (episode link pending)

- Southern R. Co. v. United States, 222 U.S. 20 (1911) [as printed: Southern R. Co. v. United States, 222 U. S. 20 (1911); Opinion of the Court (Chief Justice Rehnquist)] (episode link pending)

(+45 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 242 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/028-united-states-v-morrison

Dist. of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/025-district-of-columbia-v-heller

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep554/usrep554570/usrep554570.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Washington, D.C. banned handguns in the home and required other firearms to be kept unloaded and disassembled or trigger-locked. Dick Heller, a special police officer who carried a gun on duty at a federal building, applied to keep a handgun at home and was refused.

Justice Scalia, for a five-to-four majority, held that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms, unconnected to service in a militia, and that the handgun ban and the trigger-lock rule violated it. His opinion is a long study of the Amendment's text and its eighteenth-century meaning, treating the prefatory clause about a well-regulated militia as announcing a purpose without limiting the right.

Justice Stevens dissented with his own historical reading, focused on the militia. Justice Breyer dissented separately, arguing that even an individual right should yield to the city's interest in reducing gun violence. The clash of originalist histories is the heart of the case.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Parker v. District of Columbia, 311 F.Supp.2d 103 (2004) at 109 [as printed: Parker v. District of Columbia, 311 F. Supp. 2d 103, 109 (2004); Opinion of the Court (Justice Scalia)] (episode link pending)

- Parker v. District of Columbia, 478 F.3d 370 (2007) at 401 (case below) [as printed: Parker v. District of Columbia, 478 F. 3d 370, 401 (2007) (case below); Dissent (Souter)] (episode link pending)

- United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259 (1990) at 265 [as printed: United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U. S. 259, 265 (1990); Opinion of the Court (Justice Scalia)] (episode link pending)

- Muscarello v. United States, 524 U.S. 125 (1998) [as printed: Muscarello v. United States, 524 U. S. 125 (1998); Dissent (Justice Stevens)] (episode link pending)

- United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1876) [as printed: United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542 (1876); Dissent (Justice Stevens)] episode

- Alden v. Maine, 527 U.S. 706 (1999) at 715 [as printed: Alden v. Maine, 527 U. S. 706, 715 (1999); Dissent (Justice Stevens)] (episode link pending)

- United States v. Williams, 553 U.S. 285 (2008) [as printed: United States v. Williams, 553 U. S. 285 (2008); Opinion of the Court (Justice Scalia)] (episode link pending)

- United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939) at 178 [as printed: United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, 178 (1939); Dissent (Souter)] episode

- Robertson v. Baldwin, 165 U.S. 275 (1897) at 281 [as printed: Robertson v. Baldwin, 165 U. S. 275, 281 (1897); Opinion of the Court (Justice Scalia)] (episode link pending)

(+42 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 397 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/025-district-of-columbia-v-heller

Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/026-employment-division-v-smith

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep494/usrep494872/usrep494872.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Alfred Smith and Galen Black worked as counselors at a private drug rehabilitation organization in Oregon. They ingested peyote at a ceremony of the Native American Church, of which both were members, and were fired. Oregon then denied them unemployment benefits because they had been dismissed for work-related misconduct, and peyote possession was a crime in Oregon.

Justice Scalia, for the majority, held that the Free Exercise Clause does not excuse anyone from complying with a valid, neutral law of general applicability. Requiring a compelling government interest for every such law, he wrote, would make each conscience a law unto itself.

Justice O'Connor concurred only in the judgment and defended strict scrutiny. Justice Blackmun, joined by Justices Brennan and Marshall, dissented. The backlash was bipartisan: Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in 1993 almost unanimously, and several current justices have questioned whether Smith should survive.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Thomas v. Review Bd. of Indiana Employment Security Div., 450 U.S. 707 (1981) [as printed: Thomas v. Review Bd. of Indiana Employment Security Div., supra; Opinion of the Court (Justice Scalia Justice O’Connor)] (episode link pending)

- Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963) at 412 (Douglas, J., concurring) [as printed: Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U. S. 398, 412 (1963) (Douglas, J., concurring); Opinion of the Court (Justice Scalia Justice O’Connor)] episode

- Dept. of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 485 U.S. 660 (1988) [as printed: Dept. of Human Resources of Ore. v. Smith, 485 U. S. 660 (1988); Opinion of the Court (Justice Scalia Justice O’Connor)] (episode link pending)

- Hobbie v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n of Florida, 480 U.S. 136 (1987) [as printed: Hobbie, supra; Opinion of the Court (Justice Scalia Justice O’Connor)] (episode link pending)

- United States v. Ballard, 322 U.S. 78 (1944) at 86-88 [as printed: United States v. Ballard, 322 U. S. 78, 86-88 (1944); Opinion of the Court (Justice Scalia Justice O’Connor)] (episode link pending)

- McDaniel v. Paty, 435 U.S. 618 (1978) [as printed: McDaniel v. Paty, 435 U. S. 618 (1978); Opinion of the Court (Justice Scalia Justice O’Connor)] (episode link pending)

- Fowler v. Rhode Island, 345 U.S. 67 (1953) at 69 [as printed: Fowler v. Rhode Island, 345 U. S. 67, 69 (1953); Opinion of the Court (Justice Scalia Justice O’Connor)] (episode link pending)

- Minersville School Dist. Bd. of Ed. v. Gobitis, 310 U.S. 586 (1940) [as printed: Minersville School Dist. v. Gobitis, 310 U. S. 586 (1940); Opinion of the Court (Justice Scalia Justice O’Connor)] episode

(+35 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 273 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/026-employment-division-v-smith

Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/027-loving-v-virginia

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep388/usrep388001/usrep388001.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Mildred Jeter, a Black and Native American woman, and Richard Loving, a white man, grew up in Caroline County, Virginia. In 1958 they married in Washington, D.C., where it was legal, and returned home. A few weeks later the sheriff entered their bedroom at night. They pleaded guilty to violating Virginia's ban on interracial marriage and were sentenced to a year in jail, suspended on condition that they leave Virginia and not return together for twenty-five years.

Chief Justice Warren, for a unanimous Court, struck down the law under both the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses. Restricting marriage solely because of race, he wrote, could not be justified, and the freedom to marry is one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness. The opinion squarely rejects Virginia's argument that the law was valid because it punished both races equally.

Justice Stewart concurred briefly. June twelfth is now celebrated as Loving Day.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Naim v. Naim, 197 Va. 80 [as printed: Naim v. Naim, 197 Va. 80, 87 S. E. 2d 749; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

- Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190 (1888) [as printed: Maynard v. Hill, 125 U. S. 190 (1888); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

- Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923) [as printed: Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U. S. 390 (1923); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

- Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535 (1942) [as printed: Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U. S. 535 (1942); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] episode

- Inc. v. New York, 336 U.S. 106 (1949) [as printed: Inc. v. New York, 336 U. S. 106 (1949); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

- Inc. v. Bowers, 358 U.S. 522 (1959) [as printed: Inc. v. Bowers, 358 U. S. 522 (1959); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

- McLaughlin v. Florida, 379 U.S. 184 (1964) at 198 (concurring opinion) [as printed: McLaughlin v. Florida, 379 U. S. 184, 198 (concurring opinion); Concurrence (Mr. Justice Stewart)] (episode link pending)

- Pace v. Alabama, 106 U.S. 583 (1883) [as printed: Pace v. Alabama, 106 U. S. 583 (1883); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

- Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944) at 216 [as printed: Korematsu v. United States, 323 U. S. 214, 216 (1944); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] episode

Full list of 21 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/027-loving-v-virginia

United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/023-united-states-v-lopez

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep514/usrep514549/usrep514549.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

In 1992, Alfonso Lopez Junior, a twelfth-grader in San Antonio, brought a concealed handgun to school. He was charged under the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990, which made it a crime to possess a firearm in a school zone. Congress had cited its power to regulate interstate commerce.

Chief Justice Rehnquist, for a five-to-four majority, held that the law exceeded that power. Possessing a gun near a school is not economic activity, and upholding the law would require piling inference upon inference until there was nothing Congress could not regulate. It was the first time since 1937 that the Court struck down a law as beyond the Commerce Clause.

Justice Kennedy, joined by Justice O'Connor, concurred, and Justice Thomas wrote separately to call for rethinking the entire modern doctrine from the original meaning of "commerce." Justices Stevens, Souter, and Breyer each dissented.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Gregory v. Ashcroft, 501 U.S. 452 (1991) at 461 [as printed: Gregory v. Ashcroft, supra, at 461; Dissent (Justice Souter)] (episode link pending)

- Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1 (1824) at 196-197 (Marshall, C. J.) [as printed: Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1, 196-197 (1824) (Marshall, C. J.); Dissent (Justice Souter)] (episode link pending)

- Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942) [as printed: Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U. S. 111 (1942); Dissent (Justice Breyer)] episode

- A. L. A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States, 295 U.S. 495 (1935) at 550 [as printed: A. L. A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States, 295 U. S. 495, 550 (1935); Opinion of the Court (Chief Justice Rehnquist)] (episode link pending)

- NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U.S. 1 (1937) [as printed: NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U. S. 1 (1937); Concurrence (Justice Kennedy)] episode

- United States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100 (1941) at 116-117 (overturning the Court’s distinction between “production” and “commerce” in the child labor case, Hammer v. Dagenhart, 247 U. S. 251, 271-272 (1918)) [as printed: United States v. Darby, 312 U. S. 100, 116-117 (1941) (overturning the Court’s distinction between “production” and “commerce” in the child labor case, Hammer v. Dagenhart, 247 U. S. 251, 271-272 (1918)); Dissent (Justice Breyer)] episode

- Maryland v. Wirtz, 392 U.S. 183 (1968) at 190 [as printed: Maryland v. Wirtz, 392 U. S. 183, 190 (1968); Dissent (Justice Souter)] (episode link pending)

- National League of Cities v. Usery, 426 U.S. 833 (1976) [as printed: National League of Cities v. Usery, 426 U. S. 833 (1976); Opinion of the Court (Chief Justice Rehnquist)] (episode link pending)

(+65 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 311 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/023-united-states-v-lopez

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/020-roe-v-wade

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep410/usrep410113/usrep410113.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Norma McCorvey, using the pseudonym Jane Roe, was a pregnant, unmarried woman in Dallas who challenged Texas laws making abortion a crime except to save the mother's life. Her case was argued twice.

Justice Blackmun, for a seven-to-two majority, held that the right of privacy, founded in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether to terminate her pregnancy. He then built the trimester framework: little state regulation in the first trimester, regulation for maternal health in the second, and possible prohibition after viability.

Justices White and Rehnquist dissented. White called the decision an exercise of raw judicial power. Critics across the spectrum, including scholars who supported legal abortion, attacked the opinion's constitutional reasoning from the start. The Court modified Roe in Planned Parenthood versus Casey in 1992 and overruled it in Dobbs versus Jackson Women's Health Organization in 2022. Listen for how much of the opinion is history, and how little is constitutional text.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905) at 74 [as printed: Lochner v. New York, 198 U. S. 45, 74 (1905); Dissent (Mr. Justice Rehnquist)] episode

- Gunn v. University Committee, 399 U.S. 383 (1970) [as printed: Gunn v. University Committee, 399 U. S. 383 (1970); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Blackmun)] (episode link pending)

- Mitchell v. Donovan, 398 U.S. 427 (1970) [as printed: Mitchell v. Donovan, 398 U. S. 427 (1970); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Blackmun)] (episode link pending)

- Florida Lime Growers v. Jacobsen, 362 U.S. 73 (1960) at 80-81 [as printed: Florida Lime Growers v. Jacobsen, 362 U. S. 73, 80-81 (1960); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Blackmun)] (episode link pending)

- Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962) at 204 [as printed: Baker v. Carr, 369 U. S. 186, 204 (1962); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Blackmun)] episode

- Golden v. Zwickler, 394 U.S. 103 (1969) [as printed: Golden v. Zwickler, 394 U. S. 103 (1969); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Blackmun)] (episode link pending)

- SEC v. Medical Committee for Human Rights, 404 U.S. 403 (1972) [as printed: SEC v. Medical Committee for Human Rights, 404 U. S. 403 (1972); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Blackmun)] (episode link pending)

- Samuels v. Mackell, 401 U.S. 66 (1971) [as printed: Samuels v. Mackell, supra; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Blackmun)] (episode link pending)

- Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971) [as printed: Younger v. Harris, 401 U. S. 37 (1971); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Blackmun)] episode

(+44 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 164 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/020-roe-v-wade

Penn Cent. Transp. Co. v. New York City, 438 U.S. 104 (1978)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/021-penn-central-transportation-co-v-new-york-city

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep438/usrep438104/usrep438104.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Grand Central Terminal was designated a landmark under New York City's preservation law. Its owner, Penn Central, leased the air rights to a developer who planned an office tower of more than fifty stories on top of the terminal, designed by Marcel Breuer. The city's Landmarks Preservation Commission rejected both versions of the plan, and Penn Central argued the city had taken its property without just compensation.

Justice Brennan, for a six-to-three majority, held there was no taking. He admitted the Court had never found a set formula, and instead described an ad hoc, factual inquiry focused on the economic impact of the regulation, its interference with distinct investment-backed expectations, and the character of the government action. Those three factors still decide most regulatory takings cases.

Justice Rehnquist, joined by Chief Justice Burger and Justice Stevens, dissented, arguing that a few owners were being forced to bear a cost that should fall on the whole public.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Armstrong v. United States, 364 U.S. 40 (1960) at 49 [as printed: Armstrong v. United States, 364 U. S. 40, 49 (1960); Dissent (Mr. Justice Rehnquist)] (episode link pending)

- Gold-blatt v. Hempstead, 369 U.S. 590 (1962) [as printed: Goldblatt v. Hempstead, 369 U. S. 590 (1962); Dissent (Mr. Justice Rehnquist)] (episode link pending)

- United States v. Central Eureka Mining Co., 357 U.S. 155 (1958) at 168 [as printed: United States v. Central Eureka Mining Co., 357 U. S. 155, 168 (1958); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Brennan)] (episode link pending)

- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, 260 U.S. 393 (1922) at 415 [as printed: Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, 260 U. S. 393, 415 (1922); Dissent (Mr. Justice Rehnquist)] episode

- Nectow v. Cambridge, 277 U.S. 183 (1928) at 188 [as printed: Nectow v. Cambridge, 277 U. S. 183, 188 (1928); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Brennan)] (episode link pending)

- Welch v. Swasey, 214 U.S. 91 (1909) (height restriction) [as printed: Welch v. Swasey, 214 U. S. 91 (1909) (height restriction); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Brennan)] (episode link pending)

- Gorieb v. Fox, 274 U.S. 603 (1927) at 608 (requirement that portions of parcels be left unbuilt) [as printed: Gorieb v. Fox, 274 U. S. 603, 608 (1927) (requirement that portions of parcels be left unbuilt); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Brennan)] (episode link pending)

- Goldblatt v. Hempstead, supra, at 592-593 at 592-593 [as printed: Goldblatt v. Hempstead, supra, at 592-593; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Brennan)] (episode link pending)

(+15 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 141 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/021-penn-central-transportation-co-v-new-york-city

Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S. 71 (1971)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/024-reed-v-reed

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep404/usrep404071/usrep404071.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Richard Reed, a teenager in Idaho, died in 1967 without a will. His separated parents, Sally and Cecil Reed, each applied to administer his small estate. An Idaho statute said that among people equally entitled, males must be preferred to females, so the court appointed Cecil.

Chief Justice Burger, for a unanimous Court, held that a mandatory preference for men, adopted merely to avoid hearings, was the very kind of arbitrary legislative choice forbidden by the Equal Protection Clause. It was the first time the Court struck down a law for discriminating on the basis of sex.

The opinion is short, and it applies only rational-basis review. The lead brief for Sally Reed was written by a Rutgers law professor named Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who would build on this case for the rest of the decade toward the intermediate scrutiny now used for sex classifications.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- , supra [as printed: , supra; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Burger)] (episode link pending)

Full list of 9 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/024-reed-v-reed

Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Cmty. School Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/022-tinker-v-des-moines-independent-community-school-d

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep393/usrep393503/usrep393503.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

In December 1965, a group of Des Moines students planned to wear black armbands to mourn the dead of the Vietnam War. School principals learned of the plan and adopted a rule banning armbands. Thirteen-year-old Mary Beth Tinker, her fifteen-year-old brother John, and sixteen-year-old Christopher Eckhardt wore them anyway and were suspended.

Justice Fortas, for a seven-to-two majority, held that students do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate. Schools may restrict student speech only if it would materially and substantially disrupt school work or discipline, or invade the rights of others. A vague fear of disturbance is not enough.

Justice Black, in a fierce dissent, warned that the decision ushered in a new revolutionary era of permissiveness and that schools were for learning, not for pupils to run. Justice Harlan also dissented. Later cases have cut back on Tinker, but its test still governs.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Burnside v. Byars, 363 F.2d 744 (1966) at 748 [as printed: Burnside v. Byars, 363 F. 2d 744, 748 (C. A. 5th Cir. 1966); Concurrence (Me. Justice White)] (episode link pending)

- West Virginia v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943) [as printed: West Virginia v. Barnette, 319 U. S. 624; Dissent (Mb. Justice Black)] episode

- Stromberg v. California, 283 U.S. 359 (1931) [as printed: Stromberg v. California, 283 U. S. 359; Dissent (Mb. Justice Black)] episode

- Bartels v. Iowa, 262 U.S. 404 (1923) [as printed: Bartels v. Iowa, 262 U.S. 404 (1923); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Fortas)] (episode link pending)

- Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923) [as printed: Meyer v. Nebraska, supra; Dissent (Mb. Justice Black)] (episode link pending)

- Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949) [as printed: Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U. S. 1 (1949); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Fortas)] (episode link pending)

- Keyishian v. Board of Regents, 385 U.S. 589 (1967) at 603 [as printed: Keyishian v. Board of Regents, 385 U. S. 589, 603; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Fortas)] (episode link pending)

- Blackwell v. Issaquena County Board of Education, 363 F.2d 749 (C. A. 5th Cir. 1966) [as printed: Blackwell v. Issaquena County Board of Education, 363 F. 2d 749 (1966); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Fortas)] (episode link pending)

- Hamilton v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., 293 U.S. 245 (1934) [as printed: Hamilton v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., 293 U. S. 245 (1934); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Fortas)] (episode link pending)

(+9 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 52 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/022-tinker-v-des-moines-independent-community-school-d

United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/019-united-states-v-nixon

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep418/usrep418683/usrep418683.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Special Prosecutor Leon Jaworski subpoenaed tape recordings of President Nixon's Oval Office conversations for the Watergate cover-up trial of seven of Nixon's former aides. Nixon released edited transcripts but refused to hand over the tapes, claiming absolute executive privilege and arguing that a dispute inside the executive branch was not for courts to decide.

Chief Justice Burger, a Nixon appointee, wrote for a unanimous eight-justice Court; Justice Rehnquist, who had served in Nixon's Justice Department, took no part. The Court recognized a constitutional privilege for presidential communications, but held that a generalized claim of confidentiality must yield to the demonstrated, specific need for evidence in a pending criminal trial.

The tapes included the "smoking gun" conversation of June 23, 1972, showing Nixon directing the cover-up. Sixteen days after this decision, Nixon resigned. The opinion still frames every fight over subpoenas to presidents.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Nixon v. Sirica, 159 U.S.App.D.C. 58 (1973) at 71 [as printed: 1966). See Nixon v. Sirica, 159 U. S. App. D. C. 58, 71, 487 F. 2d 700, 713 (1973); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Burger)] (episode link pending)

- United States v. Ryan, 402 U.S. 530 (1971) at 532 [as printed: United States v. Ryan, 402 U. S. 530, 532 (1971); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Burger)] (episode link pending)

- Perlman v. United States, 247 U.S. 7 (1918) [as printed: Perlman v. United States, 247 U. S. 7 (1918); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Burger)] (episode link pending)

- United States v. Cox, 342 F.2d 167 at 171 (CA5) [as printed: United States v. Cox, 342 F. 2d 167, 171 (CA5); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Burger)] (episode link pending)

- Confiscation Cases, 7 Wall. 454 (1869) [as printed: Confiscation Cases, 7 Wall. 454 (1869); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Burger)] (episode link pending)

- Cox v. Hauberg, 381 U.S. 935 (1965) [as printed: Cox v. Hauberg, 381 U. S. 935 (1965); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Burger)] (episode link pending)

- Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962) [as printed: Baker v. Carr, 369 U. S. 186 (1962); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Burger)] episode

- United States v. ICC, 337 U.S. 426 (1949) [as printed: United States v. ICC, 337 U. S. 426 (1949); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Burger)] (episode link pending)

- United States ex rel. Accardi v. Shaughnessy, 347 U.S. 260 (1954) [as printed: United States ex rel. Accardi v. Shaughnessy, 347 U. S. 260 (1954); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Burger)] episode

(+21 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 69 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/019-united-states-v-nixon

Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/018-griswold-v-connecticut

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep381/usrep381479/usrep381479.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

An 1879 Connecticut law made it a crime for anyone, including married couples, to use contraceptives, and to help anyone do so. Estelle Griswold, director of the Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut, and Dr. C. Lee Buxton opened a clinic in New Haven to provoke a test case. They were arrested within days and fined one hundred dollars each.

Justice Douglas, for a seven-to-two majority, found a right of marital privacy in penumbras, formed by emanations, from the specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights. Justice Goldberg's concurrence leaned on the Ninth Amendment, and Justices Harlan and White grounded the result in due process.

Justice Black and Justice Stewart dissented. Stewart called it an uncommonly silly law, but said he could find no general right of privacy in the Constitution. Griswold became the foundation for Roe versus Wade and later privacy cases, and its method is still the center of the fight over unenumerated rights.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Tileston v. Ullman, 318 U.S. 44 [as printed: Tileston v. Ullman, 318 U. S. 44; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Douglas)] (episode link pending)

- Barrows v. Jackson, 346 U.S. 249 [as printed: Barrows v. Jackson, 346 U. S. 249; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Douglas)] (episode link pending)

- Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 610 [as printed: Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U. S. 610; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Douglas)] (episode link pending)

- Truax v. Raich, 239 U.S. 33 [as printed: Truax v. Raich, 239 U. S. 33; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Douglas)] (episode link pending)

- Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 at 56 [as printed: Lochner v. New York, 198 U. S. 45, 56; Dissent (Mr. Justice Black)] episode

- West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish, 300 U.S. 379 [as printed: West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish, 300 U. S. 379; Dissent (Mr. Justice Black)] episode

- Olsen v. Nebraska, 313 U.S. 236 [as printed: Olsen v. Nebraska ex rel. Western Reference & Bond Assn., 313 U. S. 236; Dissent (Mr. Justice Black)] (episode link pending)

- Lincoln Union v. Northwestern Co., 335 U.S. 525 [as printed: Lincoln Union v. Northwestern Co., 335 U. S. 525; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Douglas)] (episode link pending)

- Williamson v. Lee Optical Co., 348 U.S. 483 [as printed: Williamson v. Lee Optical Co., 348 U. S. 483; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Douglas)] (episode link pending)

- Giboney v. Empire Storage Co., 336 U.S. 490 [as printed: Giboney v. Empire Storage Co., 336 U. S. 490; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Douglas)] (episode link pending)

(+59 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 171 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/018-griswold-v-connecticut

Brown v. Bd. of Educ., 347 U.S. 483 (1954)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/017-brown-v-board-of-education

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep347/usrep347483/usrep347483.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Four cases from Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia, and Delaware challenged public schools segregated by race. In Topeka, Oliver Brown's daughter Linda had to travel across town to a Black school while a white school sat much closer. Thurgood Marshall led the NAACP's legal team. The cases were argued in 1952, Chief Justice Vinson died, and they were reargued in 1953 before the new Chief Justice, Earl Warren.

Warren worked to produce a single, unanimous, deliberately short opinion that could be read by ordinary people and printed in newspapers. It holds that in the field of public education, the doctrine of separate but equal has no place, because separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. It overturned Plessy versus Ferguson as applied to schools.

The opinion's reliance on social-science studies, in its famous footnote eleven, has been criticized ever since, including by people who fully agree with the result. The remedy came a year later in Brown Two, with its phrase "all deliberate speed."

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 [as printed: Plessy v. Ferguson, supra; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] episode

- Gong Lum v. Rice, 275 U.S. 78 [as printed: Gong Lum v. Rice, 275 U. S. 78; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

- Cumming v. County Board of Education, 175 U.S. 528 [as printed: Cumming v. County Board of Education, 175 U. S. 528; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

- Sweatt v. Painter, 339 U.S. 629 [as printed: Sweatt v. Painter, supra; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] episode

- McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 [as printed: McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, supra; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] episode

- Cubberley, supra, at 288-339 at 288-339 [as printed: Cubberley, supra, at 288-339; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

- Cremin, supra, at 269-275 at 269-275 [as printed: Cremin, supra, at 269-275; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

- Cubberley, supra, at 408-423 at 408-423 [as printed: Cubberley, supra, at 408-423; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

- Roberts v. City of Boston, 59 Mass. 198 (1850) at 206 [as printed: Roberts v. City of Boston, 59 Mass. 198, 206 (1850); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

Full list of 28 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/017-brown-v-board-of-education

M'Culloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/016-m-culloch-v-maryland

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep017/usrep017316/usrep017316.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Congress chartered the Second Bank of the United States in 1816. Maryland, like several states hostile to the Bank, imposed a tax on any bank operating in the state without a state charter. James McCulloch, cashier of the Bank's Baltimore branch, refused to pay.

Chief Justice Marshall, for a unanimous Court, answered two questions. First, Congress could create a bank even though the Constitution never mentions one, because the Necessary and Proper Clause permits means that are appropriate and plainly adapted to legitimate ends. "We must never forget," he wrote, "that it is a constitution we are expounding." Second, Maryland could not tax the Bank, because the power to tax involves the power to destroy.

This is the founding text of broad federal power and implied powers. Thomas Jefferson's allies and Southern states attacked it fiercely, and Marshall defended it in newspapers under a pen name. Every modern argument over the reach of Congress returns to this opinion.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. 1 (1824)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/015-gibbons-v-ogden

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep022/usrep022001/usrep022001.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

New York granted Robert Livingston and Robert Fulton a monopoly on steamboat navigation in its waters. Aaron Ogden held a license under that monopoly to run ferries between New York and New Jersey. Thomas Gibbons, his former partner, ran competing steamboats under a federal coasting license. Ogden won an injunction in New York's courts, and Gibbons, represented by Daniel Webster, appealed.

Chief Justice Marshall held that commerce among the states includes navigation, not just buying and selling, and that Congress's power to regulate it reaches into a state's interior wherever commerce crosses lines. Because Gibbons held a valid federal license, New York's monopoly had to yield.

Justice Johnson concurred, arguing that the commerce power was exclusive and states could not regulate interstate commerce at all. The decision broke the monopoly, steamboat traffic boomed, and the case became the first great reading of the Commerce Clause.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/010-miranda-v-arizona

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep384/usrep384436/usrep384436.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

In 1963, Phoenix police arrested Ernesto Miranda in a kidnapping and rape. After about two hours of questioning, with no lawyer and no warning of his rights, he signed a written confession. The Court took his case together with three others from New York, Missouri, and California, all involving confessions from custodial interrogation.

Chief Justice Warren, for a five-to-four majority, held that the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination applies in the police station. Before questioning a suspect in custody, police must warn him that he has the right to remain silent, that anything he says can be used against him, and that he has the right to a lawyer, appointed if he cannot afford one. Without those safeguards, statements are inadmissible.

The dissents are sharp. Justice Harlan called the rules a hazardous experimentation, and Justice White warned that the decision would return killers and rapists to the streets. Miranda himself was retried without the confession and convicted again.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 (1964) [as printed: Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U. S. 478; concurring-in-part-and-dissenting-in-part (Mr. Justice Clark)] episode

- Brown v. Walker, 161 U.S. 591 (1896) at 596 [as printed: Brown v. Walker, 161 U. S. 591, 596; Dissent (Mr. Justice White)] (episode link pending)

- Weems v. United States, 217 U.S. 349 (1910) at 373 [as printed: Weems v. United States, 217 U. S. 349, 373 (1910); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

- Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, 251 U.S. 385 (1920) at 392 [as printed: Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, 251 U. S. 385, 392 (1920); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] episode

- “Since Chambers v. Florida, 309 U.S. 227 [as printed: “Since Chambers v. Florida, 309 U. S. 227; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] episode

- Blackburn v. Alabama, 361 U.S. 199 (1960) at 206 [as printed: Blackburn v. Alabama, 361 U. S. 199, 206 (1960); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

- Townsend v. Sain, 372 U.S. 293 (1963) [as printed: Townsend v. Sain, 372 U. S. 293 (1963); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] episode

- Lynumn v. Illinois, 372 U.S. 528 (1963) at 534 [as printed: Lynumn v. Illinois, 372 U. S. 528, 534; Dissent (Mr. Justice White)] (episode link pending)

- Haynes v. Washington, 373 U.S. 503 (1963) at 513 [as printed: Haynes v. Washington, 373 U. S. 503, 513; Dissent (Mr. Justice White)] (episode link pending)

- Counselman v. Hitchcock, 142 U.S. 547 (1892) at 562 [as printed: Counselman v. Hitchcock, 142 U. S. 547, 562 (1892); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

(+87 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 246 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/010-miranda-v-arizona

Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/014-marbury-v-madison

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep005/usrep005137/usrep005137.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

In the last days of John Adams's presidency, the outgoing Federalists confirmed dozens of judicial appointments. William Marbury was named a justice of the peace for the District of Columbia, but his signed and sealed commission was never delivered. When Thomas Jefferson took office, his Secretary of State, James Madison, refused to deliver it. Marbury went straight to the Supreme Court and asked for a writ of mandamus.

Chief Justice John Marshall, himself the official who had failed to deliver the commission, wrote an opinion of political genius. Marbury had a right to his commission, and the law gave him a remedy. But the Court could not issue the writ, because the section of the Judiciary Act of 1789 giving it that power conflicted with the Constitution's limits on the Court's original jurisdiction. It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department, Marshall wrote, to say what the law is.

Jefferson won the battle. The Court won the war: the power of judicial review.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/012-terry-v-ohio

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep392/usrep392001/usrep392001.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Detective Martin McFadden had walked a downtown Cleveland beat for decades. One afternoon in 1963 he watched two men take turns strolling past a store window, peering in, and conferring on a corner, again and again. Suspecting they were casing the store for a robbery, he approached, patted down John Terry's outer clothing, and found a revolver.

There was no probable cause for an arrest, so the question was whether the frisk was a search the Fourth Amendment forbade. Chief Justice Warren, for an eight-to-one Court, held that police may briefly stop a person on reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot, and may frisk for weapons if they reasonably believe the person is armed and dangerous.

The "Terry stop" now governs millions of street encounters a year. Justices Harlan and White wrote concurrences that sharpened the rule. Justice Douglas dissented alone, warning that giving police greater power than a magistrate has is a long step down the totalitarian path.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) at 657 [as printed: Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U. S. 643, 657; Dissent (Mr. Justice Douglas-)] episode

- Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) at 351 [as printed: Katz v. United States, 389 U. S. 347, 351 (1967); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] episode

- Elkins v. United States, 364 U.S. 206 (1960) at 222 [as printed: Elkins v. United States, 364 U. S. 206, 222 (1960); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

- Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10 (1948) at 14-15 [as printed: Johnson v. United States, 333 U. S. 10, 14-15; Dissent (Mr. Justice Douglas-)] (episode link pending)

- Chapman v. United States, 365 U.S. 610 (1961) [as printed: Chapman v. United States, 365 U. S. 610 (1961); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

- Beck v. Ohio, 379 U.S. 89 (1964) at 96 [as printed: Beck v. Ohio, 379 U. S. 89, 96 (1964); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

- Warden v. Hayden, 387 U.S. 294 (1967) (hot pursuit) [as printed: Warden v. Hayden, 387 U. S. 294 (1967) (hot pursuit); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] episode

- Preston v. United States, 376 U.S. 364 (1964) at 367 [as printed: Preston v. United States, 376 U. S. 364, 367 (1964); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

- Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 U.S. 523 (1967) at 534-535, 536-537 [as printed: Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 U. S. 523, 534-535, 536-537 (1967); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

- People v. Rivera, 14 N.Y.2d 441 [as printed: People v. Rivera, 14 N. Y. 2d 441, 201 N. E. 2d 32; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Warren)] (episode link pending)

(+6 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 97 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/012-terry-v-ohio

Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/011-mapp-v-ohio

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep367/usrep367643/usrep367643.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

In 1957, Cleveland police came to Dollree Mapp's house looking for a bombing suspect. She refused to let them in without a warrant. They came back, forced the door, waved a piece of paper they called a warrant, and searched the whole house. They never found the suspect. They did find books and pictures the state called obscene, and Mapp was convicted for having them. No warrant was ever produced in court.

Twelve years earlier, in Wolf versus Colorado, the Court had held that the Fourth Amendment applied to the states but that states did not have to exclude illegally seized evidence. Justice Clark, for a six-to-three majority, overruled Wolf. Evidence obtained by an unconstitutional search is inadmissible in state court too. As Clark put it, the criminal goes free if he must, but it is the law that sets him free.

Justices Black and Douglas concurred. Justice Harlan, joined by Justices Frankfurter and Whittaker, dissented, arguing the Court had reached out to decide a question the parties had barely argued.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Wolf v. Colorado, 338 U.S. 25 (1949) [as printed: Wolf v. Colorado, 338 U. S. 25; Dissent (Mr. Justice Harlan)] (episode link pending)

- Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616 (1886) at 630 [as printed: Boyd v. United States, 116 U. S. 616, 630 (1886); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Clark)] episode

- Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914) [as printed: Weeks v. United States, 232 U. S. 383; Dissent (Mr. Justice Harlan)] episode

- Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, 251 U.S. 385 (1920) at 392 [as printed: Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, 251 U. S. 385, 392 (1920); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Clark)] episode

- Byars v. United States, 273 U.S. 28 (1927) [as printed: Byars v. United States, 273 U. S. 28 (1927); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Clark)] (episode link pending)

- Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928) at 485 [as printed: Olmstead v. United States, 277 U. S. 438, 485 (1928); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Clark)] episode

- McNabb v. United States, 318 U.S. 332 (1943) [as printed: McNabb v. United States, 318 U. S. 332 (1943); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Clark)] (episode link pending)

- Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319 (1937) [as printed: Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U. S. 319 (1937); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Clark)] (episode link pending)

- Elkins v. United States, 364 U.S. 206 at 218-219 [as printed: Elkins v. United States, 364 U. S. 206, 218-219; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Clark)] (episode link pending)

- People v. Cohan, 44 Cal. 2 [as printed: People v. Cahan, 44 Cal. 2; Dissent (Mr. Justice Harlan)] (episode link pending)

(+19 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 87 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/011-mapp-v-ohio

Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/013-baker-v-carr

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep369/usrep369186/usrep369186.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Tennessee's constitution required its legislature to reapportion seats every ten years. It had not done so since 1901. By 1960, rural counties held power far beyond their populations, and a vote in Memphis or Nashville counted for a fraction of a rural vote. Charles Baker and other urban voters sued. Earlier cases, especially Colegrove versus Green, had treated such complaints as political questions courts could not touch.

Justice Brennan, for a six-to-two majority, held that the claim was justiciable under the Equal Protection Clause, and laid out the factors still used to identify a true political question. He did not decide what fair apportionment requires. The phrase "one person, one vote" came the next year, in Gray versus Sanders.

Justice Frankfurter's dissent, joined by Justice Harlan, is one of the great warnings against judicial overreach. He called it a mathematical quagmire and said the Court's authority rests on public confidence in its detachment from political entanglements. Chief Justice Warren later called Baker the most important case of his tenure.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Newburyport Water Co. v. Newburyport, 193 U.S. 561 at 579 [as printed: Newburyport Water Co. v. Newburyport, 193 U. S. 561, 579; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Brennan)] (episode link pending)

- Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678 at 682-683 [as printed: Bell v. Hood, 327 U. S. 678, 682-683; Dissent (Mr. Justice Harlan)] (episode link pending)

- Swafford v. Templeton, 185 U.S. 487 [as printed: Swafford v. Templeton, 185 U. S. 487; Dissent (Mr. Justice Frankfurter)] (episode link pending)

- Ohio ex rel. Davis v. Hildebrant, 241 U.S. 565 at 569 [as printed: Ohio ex rel. Davis v. Hildebrant, 241 U. S. 565, 569; Dissent (Mr. Justice Frankfurter)] (episode link pending)

- Smiley v. Holm, 285 U.S. 355 [as printed: Smiley v. Holm, 285 U. S. 355; Dissent (Mr. Justice Frankfurter)] (episode link pending)

- Koenig v. Flynn, 285 U.S. 375 [as printed: Koenig v. Flynn, 285 U. S. 375; Dissent (Mr. Justice Frankfurter)] (episode link pending)

- Carroll v. Becker, 285 U.S. 380 [as printed: Carroll v. Becker, 285 U. S. 380; Dissent (Mr. Justice Frankfurter)] (episode link pending)

- Wood v. Broom, 287 U.S. 1 [as printed: Wood v. Broom, 287 U. S. 1; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Brennan)] (episode link pending)

- Mahan v. Hume, 287 U.S. 575 [as printed: Mahan v. Hume, 287 U. S. 575; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Brennan)] (episode link pending)

- Colegrove v. Green, 328 U.S. 549 [as printed: Colegrove v. Green, 328 U. S. 549; Dissent (Mr. Justice Harlan)] (episode link pending)

- MacDougall v. Green, 335 U.S. 281 [as printed: MacDougall v. Green, 335 U. S. 281; Dissent (Mr. Justice Harlan)] (episode link pending)

(+125 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 416 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/013-baker-v-carr

New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/008-new-york-times-co-v-sullivan

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep376/usrep376254/usrep376254.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

In March 1960, a full-page advertisement titled "Heed Their Rising Voices" ran in the New York Times, raising money for Martin Luther King Junior's defense and describing the treatment of civil rights protesters in Montgomery, Alabama. Some of its details were wrong. L. B. Sullivan, a Montgomery city commissioner over the police, was never named, but he sued for libel, and an Alabama jury awarded him five hundred thousand dollars. Other officials filed similar suits, which together threatened to bankrupt the paper's coverage of the South.

A unanimous Court reversed. Justice Brennan wrote that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that a public official cannot recover for a defamatory falsehood about his official conduct unless he proves actual malice: knowledge that the statement was false, or reckless disregard of whether it was false.

Justices Black and Goldberg, each joined by Justice Douglas, would have gone further, giving critics of officials an absolute privilege. Whether actual malice should be rethought is a live debate on the Court today.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Ex parte Virginia, 100 U.S. 339 at 346-347 [as printed: Ex parte Virginia, 100 U. S. 339, 346-347; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Brennan)] (episode link pending)

- American Federation of Labor v. Swing, 312 U.S. 321 [as printed: American Federation of Labor v. Swing, 312 U. S. 321; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Brennan)] (episode link pending)

- Valentine v. Chrestensen, 316 U.S. 52 [as printed: Valentine v. Chrestensen, 316 U. S. 52; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Brennan)] (episode link pending)

- Smith v. California, 361 U.S. 147 [as printed: Smith v. California, 361 U. S. 147; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Brennan)] (episode link pending)

- Inc., v. Sullivan, 372 U.S. 58 at 70 [as printed: Inc., v. Sullivan, 372 U. S. 58, 70; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Brennan)] (episode link pending)

- Alabama Ride Co. v. Vance, 235 Ala. 263 (1938) [as printed: Alabama Ride Co. v. Vance, 235 Ala. 263, 178 So. 438 (1938); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Brennan)] (episode link pending)

- Johnson Publishing Co. v. Davis, 271 Ala. 474 (1960) at 494-495 [as printed: Johnson Publishing Co. v. Davis, 271 Ala. 474, 494-495, 124 So. 2d 441, 457-458 (1960); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Brennan)] (episode link pending)

- Pennekamp v. Florida, 328 U.S. 331 at 342, 343, n. 5, 345 [as printed: Pennekamp v. Florida, 328 U. S. 331, 342, 343, n. 5, 345; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Brennan)] (episode link pending)

(+23 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 136 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/008-new-york-times-co-v-sullivan

Erie R.R. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/006-erie-railroad-v-tompkins

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep304/usrep304064/usrep304064.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Late one night in 1934, Harry Tompkins was walking along a well-worn footpath beside the Erie Railroad's tracks in Hughestown, Pennsylvania, when something sticking out from a passing freight train, he said an open door, struck him and cost him his arm. Under Pennsylvania law, he was a trespasser, and the railroad owed him almost nothing. So he sued in federal court in New York, where judges applied their own "general" common law under Swift versus Tyson, a rule nearly a century old.

Justice Brandeis, in an opinion neither party had asked for, overruled Swift. There is no federal general common law, he wrote. In cases between citizens of different states, federal courts must apply state law, judge-made as well as statutory. He went further, calling the old practice an unconstitutional assumption of power.

Justice Reed agreed with the result but not the constitutional reasoning. Justice Butler, joined by Justice McReynolds, dissented, pointing out that no one had briefed or argued whether Swift should survive.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Swift v. Tyson, 16 Pet. 1 [as printed: Swift v. Tyson [1842, 16 Pet. 1; Opinion of the Court (•Mr. Justice Brandéis)] (episode link pending)

- Mason v. United States, 260 U.S. 545 at 559 [as printed: Mason v. United States, 260 U. S. 545, 559; Opinion of the Court (•Mr. Justice Brandéis)] (episode link pending)

- Black & White Taxicab Co. v. Brown & Yellow Taxicab Co., 276 U.S. 518 at 535 [as printed: Black & White Taxicab Co. v. Brown & Yellow Taxicab Co., 276 U. S. 518, 535; Concurrence (Mr. Justice Reed)] (episode link pending)

- Baltimore & Ohio R. Co. v. Baugh, 149 U.S. 368 at 390 [as printed: Baltimore & Ohio R. Co. v. Baugh, 149 U. S. 368, 390; Opinion of the Court (•Mr. Justice Brandéis)] (episode link pending)

- Falchetti v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 307 Pa. 203 [as printed: Falchetti v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 307 Pa. 203; Opinion of the Court (•Mr. Justice Brandéis)] (episode link pending)

- Koontz v. B. & O. R. Co., 309 Pa. 122 [as printed: Koontz v. B. & O. R. Co., 309 Pa. 122; Opinion of the Court (•Mr. Justice Brandéis)] (episode link pending)

- Kuhn v. Fairmont Coal Co., 215 U.S. 349 [as printed: Kuhn v. Fairmont Coal Co., 215 U. S. 349; Opinion of the Court (•Mr. Justice Brandéis)] (episode link pending)

- 258 U. S. 268. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co. v. Goodman, 275 U.S. 66 at 70 [as printed: 258 U. S. 268. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co. v. Goodman, 275 U. S. 66, 70; Opinion of the Court (•Mr. Justice Brandéis)] (episode link pending)

- Pokora v. Wabash Ry. Co., 292 U.S. 98 [as printed: Pokora v. Wabash Ry. Co., 292 U. S. 98; Opinion of the Court (•Mr. Justice Brandéis)] (episode link pending)

(+26 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 91 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/006-erie-railroad-v-tompkins

Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/005-katz-v-united-states

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep389/usrep389347/usrep389347.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Charles Katz was a Los Angeles gambler who phoned betting information to Miami and Boston from a row of public telephone booths. FBI agents attached a listening and recording device to the outside of one booth and taped his end of the calls. Under Olmstead versus United States, decided in 1928, that was not a search at all, because the agents never physically entered the booth.

The Court, seven to one, threw out that trespass rule. Justice Stewart wrote the line that defines the case: the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. But the test courts still use came from Justice Harlan's short concurrence, which asks whether a person has an actual expectation of privacy that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable.

Justice Black dissented alone, and his dissent is worth your full attention: he argued that the Amendment's words, "persons, houses, papers, and effects," cannot be stretched to cover overheard conversations, and that the Court was rewriting the Constitution to keep it up to date.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Rios v. United States, 364 U.S. 253 [as printed: Rios v. United States, 364 U. S. 253; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stewart)] (episode link pending)

- Goldman v. United States, 316 U.S. 129 [as printed: Goldman v. United States, 316 U. S. 129; Dissent (Mr. Justice Black)] (episode link pending)

- Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 at 457, 464, 466 [as printed: Olmstead v. United States, 277 U. S. 438, 457, 464, 466; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stewart)] episode

- Warden v. Hayden, 387 U.S. 294 [as printed: Warden v. Hayden, 387 U. S. 294; Dissent (Mr. Justice Black)] episode

- Silverman v. United States, 365 U.S. 505 [as printed: Silverman v. United States, 365 U. S. 505; Dissent (Mr. Justice Black)] (episode link pending)

- Osborn v. United States, 385 U.S. 323 [as printed: Osborn v. United States, 385 U. S. 323 (1966); Concurrence (Mr. Justice White)] (episode link pending)

- Berger v. New York, 388 U.S. 41 at 76 [as printed: Berger v. New York, 388 U. S. 41, 76; Dissent (Mr. Justice Black)] (episode link pending)

- Agnello v. United States, 269 U.S. 20 at 30 [as printed: Agnello v. United States, 269 U. S. 20, 30; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stewart)] (episode link pending)

- Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 [as printed: Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U. S. 471; Concurrence (Mr. Justice Harlan)] episode

- United States v. Jeffers, 342 U.S. 48 at 51 [as printed: United States v. Jeffers, 342 U. S. 48, 51; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stewart)] (episode link pending)

- Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 [as printed: Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U. S. 479; Dissent (Mr. Justice Black)] episode

(+16 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 58 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/005-katz-v-united-states

Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (1938)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/059-johnson-v-zerbst

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep304/usrep304458/usrep304458.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

John Johnson, a Marine on leave, was arrested in Charleston, South Carolina, with another man for passing counterfeit twenty-dollar bills. They could not afford lawyers. Without counsel, they were arraigned, tried, convicted, and sentenced to four and a half years, all on the same day. From the federal penitentiary in Atlanta, Johnson sought a writ of habeas corpus.

Justice Black, for the Court, held that the Sixth Amendment requires counsel in all federal criminal prosecutions unless the defendant competently and intelligently waives the right. A waiver, he wrote, is an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege, a definition still quoted in thousands of cases. Without counsel or a valid waiver, the trial court lost jurisdiction, and habeas relief was available.

Justice Reed concurred in part. Justices McReynolds and Butler dissented. Twenty-five years later, in Gideon versus Wainwright, Black extended the right to state prosecutions.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Patton v. United States, 281 U.S. 276 [as printed: Patton v. United States, 281 U. S. 276; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Black)] (episode link pending)

- Mooney v. Holohan, 294 U.S. 103 at 113 [as printed: Mooney v. Holohan, 294 U. S. 103, 113; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Black)] (episode link pending)

- Frank v. Mangum, 237 U.S. 309 at 327 [as printed: Frank v. Mangum, 237 U. S. 309, 327; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Black)] (episode link pending)

- Petitioner, supra [as printed: Petitioner, supra; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Black)] (episode link pending)

Full list of 31 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/059-johnson-v-zerbst

United States v. Carolene Prods. Co., 304 U.S. 144 (1938)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/030-united-states-v-carolene-products-co

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep304/usrep304144/usrep304144.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

The Filled Milk Act of 1923 banned shipping skimmed milk mixed with vegetable oil across state lines. Carolene Products, which sold such a product called Milnut, was indicted and argued the law violated due process and exceeded Congress's commerce power.

Justice Stone, for the Court, upheld the law with great deference. Economic legislation is presumed constitutional and will stand if it rests upon some rational basis within the knowledge and experience of the legislators. That is the birth of modern rational-basis review.

The case is famous, though, for its footnote four, which may be the most celebrated footnote in American law. Stone suggested that more searching review might be appropriate for laws that appear to violate a specific prohibition in the Bill of Rights, that restrict the political processes, or that target discrete and insular minorities. That footnote laid out the logic of tiered scrutiny that still structures constitutional law. Justice McReynolds dissented, and Justice Black concurred in part.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- United States v. Carolene Products Co., 7 F.Supp. 500 [as printed: United States v. Carolene Products Co., 7 F. Supp. 500; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stone)] (episode link pending)

- Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1 at 196 [as printed: Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1, 196; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stone)] (episode link pending)

- Hope v. United States, 227 U.S. 308 [as printed: Hope v. United States, supra; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stone)] (episode link pending)

- Hipolite Egg Co. v. United States, 220 U.S. 45 [as printed: Hipolite Egg Co. v. United States, 220 U. S. 45; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stone)] (episode link pending)

- Lottery Case, 188 U.S. 321 [as printed: Lottery Case, supra; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stone)] (episode link pending)

- Reid v. Colorado, 187 U.S. 137 [as printed: Reid v. Colorado, supra; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stone)] (episode link pending)

- Hebe Co. v. Shaw, 248 U.S. 297 [as printed: Hebe Co. v. Shaw, 248 U. S. 297; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stone)] (episode link pending)

- South Carolina v. Barnwell Bros. Inc., 303 U.S. 177 [as printed: South Carolina v. Barnwell Bros. Inc., 303 U. S. 177; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stone)] (episode link pending)

- Powell v. Pennsylvania, 127 U.S. 678 [as printed: Powell v. Pennsylvania, 127 U. S. 678; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stone)] (episode link pending)

- Capital City Dairy Co. v. Ohio, 183 U.S. 238 [as printed: Capital City Dairy Co. v. Ohio, 183 U. S. 238; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Stone)] (episode link pending)

(+20 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 46 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/030-united-states-v-carolene-products-co

Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U.S. 714 (1878)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/009-pennoyer-v-neff

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep095/usrep095714/usrep095714.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Marcus Neff owned land in Oregon but did not live there. A Portland lawyer named John Mitchell sued him for unpaid fees, notified him only by a newspaper notice he almost certainly never saw, and got a default judgment of less than eight hundred dollars, including costs. The land was then sold at a sheriff's sale to Sylvester Pennoyer, who would later become governor of Oregon. Neff sued in federal court to get his land back.

Justice Field's opinion built the territorial theory of jurisdiction that ruled American law for the next seventy years. A state has power over persons and property within its borders, and none beyond them. A court could not enter a personal judgment against a non-resident served only by publication, and a court could not reach his property unless it was attached at the start of the case. Neff won.

Justice Hunt dissented. Almost every civil procedure course still starts here, because International Shoe can only be understood as a reply to this case.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Watkins v. Holman, 16 Pet. 25 [as printed: Watkins v. Holman, 16 Pet. 25; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Field)] (episode link pending)

- Corbett v. Nutt, 10 Wall. 464 [as printed: Corbett v. Nutt, 10 Wall. 464; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Field)] (episode link pending)

- Boswell’s Lessee v. Otis, 9 How. 336 [as printed: Boswell’s Lessee v. Otis, 9 How. 336; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Field)] (episode link pending)

- Thompson v. Whitman, 18 Wall. 457 [as printed: Thompson v. Whitman, 18 Wall. 457; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Field)] (episode link pending)

- Smith v. McCutchen, 38 Mo. 415 [as printed: Smith v. McCutchen, supra; Dissent (Mr. Justice Hunt)] (episode link pending)

- , supra [as printed: , supra; Dissent (Mr. Justice Hunt)] (episode link pending)

- Cooper v. Reynolds, 10 Wall. 308 [as printed: Cooper v. Reynolds, 10 Wall. 308; Dissent (Mr. Justice Hunt)] (episode link pending)

- Webster v. Reid, 11 How. 437 [as printed: Webster v. Reid, 11 How. 437; Dissent (Mr. Justice Hunt)] (episode link pending)

- Voorhees v. Jackson, 10 Pet. 449 [as printed: Voorhees v. Jackson, 10 Pet. 449; Dissent (Mr. Justice Hunt)] (episode link pending)

- Bissell v. Briggs, 9 Mass. 462 [as printed: Bissell v. Briggs, 9 Mass. 462; Dissent (Mr. Justice Hunt)] (episode link pending)

- Jarvis v. Barrett, 14 Wis. 591 [as printed: Jarvis v. Barrett, 14 Wis. 591; Dissent (Mr. Justice Hunt)] (episode link pending)

Full list of 19 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/009-pennoyer-v-neff

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/004-anderson-v-liberty-lobby-inc

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep477/usrep477242/usrep477242.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

Columnist Jack Anderson's magazine, The Investigator, ran articles portraying Liberty Lobby and its founder Willis Carto as neo-Nazi, antisemitic, and racist. Liberty Lobby sued for libel. As public figures, they had to prove actual malice, by clear and convincing evidence. The trial court granted summary judgment for the defendants, and the D.C. Circuit partly reversed, in an opinion written by then-Judge Antonin Scalia.

The Supreme Court's question was procedural but enormous: when a judge decides whether there is a genuine issue for trial, does the heightened burden of proof count? Justice White said yes. The test is whether a reasonable jury could find for the non-moving party under the evidentiary standard that would actually apply at trial.

Along with Celotex and Matsushita, decided the same term, this case remade summary judgment into the workhorse of federal civil litigation. Justice Brennan dissented, and Justice Rehnquist, joined by Chief Justice Burger, dissented separately, both warning that judges were being invited to weigh evidence that belongs to juries.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964) at 279-280 [as printed: New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U. S. 254, 279-280 (1964); Opinion of the Court (Justice White)] episode

- First National Bank of Arizona v. Cities Service Co., 391 U.S. 253 (1968) at 288-289 [as printed: First National Bank of Arizona v. Cities Service Co., 391 U. S. 253, 288-289 (1968); Dissent (Justice Brennan)] episode

- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144 (1970) [as printed: Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co., 398 U. S. 144 (1970); Dissent (Justice Brennan)] episode

- Service, supra [as printed: Service, supra; Opinion of the Court (Justice White)] (episode link pending)

- Service, supra, at 288-289 at 288-289 [as printed: Service, supra, at 288-289; Opinion of the Court (Justice White)] (episode link pending)

- Dombrowski v. Eastland, 387 U.S. 82 (1967) (per curiam) [as printed: Dombrowski v. Eastland, 387 U. S. 82 (1967) (per curiam); Dissent (Justice Brennan)] (episode link pending)

- Improvement Co. v. Munson, 14 Wall. 442 (1872) at 448 [as printed: Improvement Co. v. Munson, 14 Wall. 442, 448 (1872); Opinion of the Court (Justice White)] (episode link pending)

- Inc. v. NLRB, 461 U.S. 731 (1983) at 745, n. 11 [as printed: Inc. v. NLRB, 461 U. S. 731, 745, n. 11 (1983); Opinion of the Court (Justice White)] (episode link pending)

- United States v. Feinberg, 140 F.2d 592 (1944) at 594 (CA2) [as printed: United States v. Feinberg, 140 F. 2d 592, 594 (CA2); Dissent (Justice Rehnquist)] (episode link pending)

(+7 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 73 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/004-anderson-v-liberty-lobby-inc

Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/003-chevron-u-s-a-inc-v-natural-resources-defense-coun

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep467/usrep467837/usrep467837.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 required permits for new or modified "stationary sources" of pollution in areas that failed air-quality standards. The Reagan-era EPA decided a whole plant could be treated as a single source, as if it sat under one bubble, so a company could add equipment without a permit as long as total emissions did not rise. Environmental groups sued, and the D.C. Circuit struck the rule down.

Justice Stevens, writing for a unanimous six-justice Court, reversed. His opinion set out the famous two steps: if Congress has spoken directly to the question, that ends it; if the statute is silent or ambiguous, courts defer to the agency's reasonable interpretation.

By most accounts, Stevens saw it as a routine opinion. It became one of the most cited cases in American law and the foundation of the administrative state's power to interpret its own statutes, until the Court overruled it forty years later in Loper Bright Enterprises versus Raimondo.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Inc. v. Gorsuch, 222 U.S.App.D.C. 268 (1982) [as printed: Inc. v. Gorsuch, 222 U. S. App. D. C. 268, 685 F. 2d 718 (1982); Opinion of the Court (Justice Stevens)] (episode link pending)

- United States v. Shimer, 367 U.S. 374 (1961) at 382, 383 [as printed: United States v. Shimer, 367 U. S. 374, 382, 383 (1961); Opinion of the Court (Justice Stevens)] (episode link pending)

- Jewell Ridge Coal Corp. v. Mine Workers, 325 U.S. 161 (1945) at 168-169 [as printed: Jewell Ridge Coal Corp. v. Mine Workers, 325 U. S. 161, 168-169 (1945); Opinion of the Court (Justice Stevens)] (episode link pending)

- Alabama Power Co. v. Costle, 204 U.S.App.D.C. 51 (1979) [as printed: Alabama Power Co. v. Costle, 204 U. S. App. D. C. 51, 636 F. 2d 323 (1979); Opinion of the Court (Justice Stevens)] (episode link pending)

- ASARCO Inc. v. EPA, 188 U.S.App.D.C. 77 (1978) [as printed: ASARCO Inc. v. EPA, 188 U. S. App. D. C. 77, 578 F. 2d 319 (1978); Opinion of the Court (Justice Stevens)] (episode link pending)

- Zenith Radio Corp. v. United States, 437 U.S. 443 (1978) at 450 [as printed: Zenith Radio Corp. v. United States, 437 U. S. 443, 450 (1978); Opinion of the Court (Justice Stevens)] (episode link pending)

- Udall v. Tallman, 380 U.S. 1 (1965) at 16 [as printed: Udall v. Tallman, 380 U. S. 1, 16 (1965); Opinion of the Court (Justice Stevens)] episode

- Unemployment Compensation Comm’n v. Aragon, 329 U.S. 143 (1946) at 153 [as printed: Unemployment Compensation Comm’n v. Aragon, 329 U. S. 143, 153 (1946); Opinion of the Court (Justice Stevens)] (episode link pending)

(+10 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 85 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/003-chevron-u-s-a-inc-v-natural-resources-defense-coun

Int'l Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/002-international-shoe-co-v-washington

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep326/usrep326310/usrep326310.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

International Shoe was a Delaware corporation based in St. Louis. It had no office in Washington State and kept no stock of shoes there. What it did have was a dozen or so salesmen who lived in Washington, showed samples, and sent orders back to Missouri. When Washington demanded contributions to its unemployment compensation fund based on those salesmen, the company said the state had no power over it at all.

For nearly seventy years, Pennoyer versus Neff had tied a court's power to physical presence. Chief Justice Stone replaced that test with a phrase every law student memorizes: due process requires only that the defendant have certain minimum contacts with the forum, such that the suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. The company lost.

Justice Black wrote separately, warning that "fair play" handed judges a vague standard to second-guess the states. Whether he was right is still argued over today.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Green v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co., 205 U.S. 530 at 533 [as printed: Green v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co., 205 U. S. 530, 533; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Stone)] (episode link pending)

- Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457 [as printed: Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U. S. 457; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Stone)] episode

- Klein v. Board of Supervisors, 282 U.S. 19 at 24 [as printed: Klein v. Board of Supervisors, 282 U. S. 19, 24; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Stone)] (episode link pending)

- Hutchinson v. Chase & Gilbert, 45 F.2d 139 at 141 [as printed: Hutchinson v. Chase & Gilbert, 45 F. 2d 139, 141; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Stone)] (episode link pending)

- St. Louis S. W. R. Co. v. Alexander, 227 U.S. 218 [as printed: St. Louis S. W. R. Co. v. Alexander, 227 U. S. 218; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Stone)] (episode link pending)

- Old Wayne Life Assn. v. McDonough, 204 U.S. 8 [as printed: Old Wayne Life Assn. v. McDonough, supra; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Stone)] (episode link pending)

- Simon v. Southern R. Co., 236 U.S. 115 [as printed: Simon v. Southern R. Co., 236 U. S. 115; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Stone)] (episode link pending)

- Davis v. Farmers Co-operative Co., 262 U.S. 312 at 317 [as printed: Davis v. Farmers Co-operative Co., 262 U. S. 312, 317; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Stone)] (episode link pending)

- Missouri, K. & T. R. Co. v. Reynolds, 255 U.S. 565 [as printed: Missouri, K. & T. R. Co. v. Reynolds, 255 U. S. 565; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Chief Justice Stone)] (episode link pending)

(+7 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 79 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/002-international-shoe-co-v-washington

World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, 444 U.S. 286 (1980)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/001-world-wide-volkswagen-corp-v-woodson

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep444/usrep444286/usrep444286.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

In 1976 Harry and Kay Robinson bought a new Audi from a dealer in Massena, New York, and set out for a new life in Arizona. On an Oklahoma highway another car slammed into them from behind, and the Audi caught fire. They sued in Oklahoma state court, naming not just the manufacturer and the importer but also the regional distributor and the small New York dealership that sold them the car.

The question was simple to state and hard to answer: can a state hale a defendant into its courts just because it was foreseeable that a product would end up there? The answer, by a vote of six to three, was no. Justice White wrote that the defendant's own conduct and connection with the forum must be such that it should reasonably anticipate being haled into court there. A car's mobility is not enough.

Justices Brennan, Marshall, and Blackmun each dissented. Listen for Brennan's argument that the whole minimum-contacts framework had drifted away from fairness.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Kulko v. California Superior Court, 436 U.S. 84 (1978) [as printed: Kulko v. California Superior Court, supra; Dissent (Mr. Justice Marshall)] (episode link pending)

- Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U.S. 714 (1878) [as printed: Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U. S. 714 (1878); Dissent (Me. Justice Brennan)] episode

- Mullane v. Central Hanover Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306 (1950) at 313 [as printed: Mullane v. Central Hanover Trust Co., 339 U. S. 306, 313 (1950); Dissent (Me. Justice Brennan)] episode

- International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945) [as printed: International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U. S. 310 (1945); Dissent (Mr. Justice Blackmun)] episode

- Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457 (1940) at 463 [as printed: Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U. S. 457, 463 (1940); Dissent (Mr. Justice Marshall)] episode

- Shaffer v. Heitner, 433 U.S. 186 (1977) at 204 [as printed: Shaffer v. Heitner, 433 U. S. 186, 204 (1977); Dissent (Mr. Justice Marshall)] episode

- McGee v. International Life Ins. Co., 355 U.S. 220 (1957) [as printed: McGee v. International Life Ins. Co., 355 U. S. 220 (1957); Dissent (Mr. Justice Marshall)] (episode link pending)

- Inc. v. Du Mond, 336 U.S. 525 (1949) at 538 [as printed: Inc. v. Du Mond, 336 U. S. 525, 538 (1949); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice White)] (episode link pending)

- Hanson v. Denckla, 357 U.S. 235 (1958) [as printed: Hanson v. Denckla, 357 U. S. 235 (1958); Dissent (Mr. Justice Marshall)] episode

- Harris v. Balk, 198 U.S. 215 (1905) [as printed: Harris v. Balk, 198 U. S. 215 (1905); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice White)] (episode link pending)

(+12 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 95 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/001-world-wide-volkswagen-corp-v-woodson

Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963)

Full notes and cites: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/007-gideon-v-wainwright

Official text (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress): https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep372/usrep372335/usrep372335.pdf

Full text of the opinions, AI-narrated (Kokoro-82M, voice af_heart). Original introduction; opinion text is public domain. Not legal advice.

In 1961, someone broke into a poolroom in Panama City, Florida. Clarence Earl Gideon, a drifter with an eighth-grade education, was charged with breaking and entering. He asked the judge for a lawyer. Under Betts versus Brady, decided in 1942, Florida only had to appoint counsel in non-capital cases if there were special circumstances, so the judge said no. Gideon defended himself, lost, and got five years.

From prison he wrote a petition to the Supreme Court in pencil. The Court took the case and appointed Abe Fortas, a future Justice, to argue it. Justice Black, who had dissented in Betts twenty-one years earlier, now wrote for a unanimous Court that the right to counsel is fundamental, and that any person too poor to hire a lawyer cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided for him. Betts was overruled.

Justices Douglas, Clark, and Harlan wrote concurrences. At his retrial, with a lawyer this time, Gideon was acquitted.

Citations: reporter citations were shortened or left out of the audio; every citation is listed on the website.

Cases named aloud

- Betts v. Brady, 316 U.S. 455 [as printed: Betts v. Brady, 316 U. S. 455 (1942); Concurrence (Mr. Justice Clark)] episode

- Hurtado v. California, 110 U.S. 516 (1884) [as printed: Hurtado v. California, 110 U. S. 516 (1884); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Black)] episode

- Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932) [as printed: Powell v. Alabama, 287 U. S. 45; Concurrence (Mr. Justice Harlan)] episode

- Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319 (1937) [as printed: Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U. S. 319; Concurrence (Mr. Justice Harlan)] (episode link pending)

- Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (1938) at 462 [as printed: Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U. S. 458, 462 (1938); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Black)] episode

- Avery v. Alabama, 308 U.S. 444 (1940) [as printed: Avery v. Alabama, 308 U. S. 444 (1940); Concurrence (Mr. Justice Clark)] (episode link pending)

- Smith v. O’Grady, 312 U.S. 329 (1941) [as printed: Smith v. O’Grady, 312 U. S. 329 (1941); Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Black)] (episode link pending)

- O’Neil v. Vermont, 144 U.S. 323 at 362-363, 370-371 [as printed: O’Neil v. Vermont, 144 U. S. 323, 362-363, 370-371; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Black)] (episode link pending)

- Adamson v. California, 332 U.S. 46 at 71-72, 124 [as printed: Adamson v. California, 332 U. S. 46, 71-72, 124; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Black)] (episode link pending)

- Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36 at 118-119, 122 [as printed: Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36, 118-119, 122; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Black)] (episode link pending)

- Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U.S. 90 at 92 [as printed: Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U. S. 90, 92; Opinion of the Court (Mr. Justice Black)] (episode link pending)

(+17 more named aloud; see the website)

Full list of 65 citations not read aloud: https://opinion-of-the-court.pages.dev/ep/007-gideon-v-wainwright