Search the opinions of the US Supreme Court

Find lawyers in the LII Lawyer Directory

Your query religion and free or establishment returned 36 results.

	SCHOOL DISTRICT OF ABINGTON TOWNSHIP, PENNSYLVANIA V. SCHEMPP [Concurrence]
	COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY V. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, GREATER PITTSBURGH CHAPTER [Opinion]
	LEE V. WEISMAN [Concurrence]
	ROSENBERGER V. RECTOR & VISITORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA [Dissent]
	MITCHELL V. HELMS [Dissent]
	COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY V. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, GREATER PITTSBURGH CHAPTER [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY V. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, GREATER PITTSBURGH CHAPTER [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	MARSH V. CHAMBERS [Dissent]
	VALLEY FORGE CHRISTIAN COLLEGE V. AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE, INC. [Dissent]
	MITCHELL V. HELMS [Concurrence]
	EVERSON V. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF EWING [Dissent]
	LEE V. WEISMAN [Concurrence]
	WALLACE V. JAFFREE [Dissent]
	COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY V. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, GREATER PITTSBURGH CHAPTER [Concurrence]
	ZELMAN V. SIMMONS-HARRIS [Dissent]
	LYNCH V. DONNELLY [Opinion]
	WALLACE V. JAFFREE [Opinion]
	LYNCH V. DONNELLY [Dissent]
	COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY V. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, GREATER PITTSBURGH CHAPTER [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY V. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, GREATER PITTSBURGH CHAPTER [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	HEART OF ATLANTA MOTEL, INC. V. UNITED STATES [Opinion]
	WALLACE V. JAFFREE [Concurrence]
	ROSENBERGER V. RECTOR & VISITORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA [Opinion]
	SCHOOL DISTRICT OF ABINGTON TOWNSHIP, PENNSYLVANIA V. SCHEMPP [Opinion]
	EDWARDS V. AGUILLARD [Dissent]
	MITCHELL V. HELMS [Opinion]
	VALLEY FORGE CHRISTIAN COLLEGE V. AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE, INC. [Opinion]
	ENGEL V. VITALE [Opinion]
	WALZ V. TAX COMM'N OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK [Dissent]
	THOMAS V. REVIEW BOARD OF THE INDIANA EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DIVISION [Dissent]
	ZELMAN V. SIMMONS-HARRIS [Opinion]
	SCHOOL DISTRICT V. BALL [Opinion]
	SANTA FE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. V. DOE [Opinion]
	MUELLER V. ALLEN [Opinion]
	ZELMAN V. SIMMONS-HARRIS [Dissent]
	WELSH V. UNITED STATES [Dissent]
	LEE V. WEISMAN [Dissent]
	LEE V. WEISMAN [Opinion]
	EDWARDS V. AGUILLARD [Opinion]
	SCHOOL DISTRICT OF ABINGTON TOWNSHIP, PENNSYLVANIA V. SCHEMPP [Dissent]
	MARSH V. CHAMBERS [Opinion]
	ILLINOIS EX REL. MCCOLLUM V. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF SCHOOL DISTRICT [Dissent]
	WIDMAR V. VINCENT [Opinion]
	BOARD OF EDUCATION OF WESTSIDE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS V. MERGENS BY AND THROUGH MERGENS [Opinion]
	ROSENBERGER V. RECTOR & VISITORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA [Concurrence]
	COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY V. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, GREATER PITTSBURGH CHAPTER [Syllabus]
	WALZ V. TAX COMM'N OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK [Concurrence]
	SANTA FE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. V. DOE [Dissent]
	SHERBERT V. VERNER [Concurrence]
	HEIN V. FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUNDATION, INC. [Syllabus]
	MITCHELL V. HELMS [Syllabus] Whether a program under Chapter 2 of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, 20 U.S.C. 7301, et seq., which provides federal funds to state and local education agencies to purchase and lend neutral, secular, and nonreligious materials such as computers, software, and library books to public and nonpublic schools for use by the students attending those schools, and which allocates the funds on an equal per-student basis, regardless of the religious or secular character of the schools the students choose to attend, violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
	EDWARDS V. AGUILLARD [Concurrence]
	ZELMAN V. SIMMONS-HARRIS [Concurrence]
	MITCHELL V. HELMS [Syllabus]
	BOARD OF EDUCATION OF WESTSIDE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS V. MERGENS BY AND THROUGH MERGENS [Dissent]
	WALZ V. TAX COMM'N OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK [Opinion]
	BOARD OF EDUCATION OF WESTSIDE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS V. MERGENS BY AND THROUGH MERGENS [Concurrence]
	MCDANIEL V. PATY [Concurrence]
	AGUILAR V. FELTON [Opinion]
	AGUILAR V. FELTON [Dissent]
	LEMON V. KURTZMAN [Opinion]
	EVERSON V. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF EWING [Opinion]
	HARRIS V. MCRAE [Opinion]
	LEMON V. KURTZMAN []
	LYNCH V. DONNELLY [Concurrence]
	BUCKLEY V. VALEO [Opinion]
	LAMB'S CHAPEL V. CENTER MORICHES UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT [Opinion]
	CHURCH OF LUKUMI BABALU AYE, INC. V. CITY OF HIALEAH [Opinion]
	SCHOOL DISTRICT OF ABINGTON TOWNSHIP, PENNSYLVANIA V. SCHEMPP [Concurrence]
	AGOSTINI V. FELTON, 117 S.CT. 1997, 138 L.ED.2D 391 (1997). [Syllabus]
	WALLACE V. JAFFREE [Concurrence]
	HEART OF ATLANTA MOTEL, INC. V. UNITED STATES [Concurrence]
	WALLACE V. JAFFREE [Dissent]
	MCDANIEL V. PATY [Opinion]
	COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY V. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, GREATER PITTSBURGH CHAPTER [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	HEART OF ATLANTA MOTEL, INC. V. UNITED STATES [Concurrence]
	BOARD OF EDUCATION OF WESTSIDE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS V. MERGENS BY AND THROUGH MERGENS [Syllabus]
	VALLEY FORGE CHRISTIAN COLLEGE V. AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE, INC. [Dissent]
	COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY V. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, GREATER PITTSBURGH CHAPTER [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	ZELMAN V. SIMMONS-HARRIS [Concurrence]
	LEMON V. KURTZMAN [Concurrence]
	ROSENBERGER V. UNIVERSITY OF VA., 515 U.S. 819 (1995). [Syllabus]
	CAPITOL SQUARE REVIEW BD. V. PINETTE, 515 U.S. 753 (1995). [Syllabus]
	GOOD NEWS CLUB V. MILFORD CENTRAL SCHOOL [Syllabus] When Milford Central School excluded the Good News Club from meeting after hours at the school on the ground that the Club was religious in nature, it violated the Club's free speech rights; that violation is not justified by Milford's concern that permitting the Club's activities would violate the Establishment Clause.
	HOBBIE V. UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMM'N OF FLORIDA [Opinion]
	WISCONSIN V. YODER [Opinion]
	STONE V. GRAHAM [Opinion]
	BOARD OF EDUCATION V. ALLEN [Opinion]
	ROSENBERGER V. RECTOR & VISITORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA [Syllabus]
	BOARD OF EDUCATION V. ALLEN [Dissent]
	LAMB'S CHAPEL V. CENTER MORICHES UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT [Concurrence]
	AGUILAR V. FELTON [Concurrence]
	WIDMAR V. VINCENT [Dissent]
	MCCREARY COUNTY V. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIESUNION OF KY. [Syllabus]
	SANTA FE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. V. DOE [Syllabus] Whether petitioner's policy permitting student-led, student-initiated prayer at football games violates the Establishment Clause."
	[Syllabus]
	LEMON V. KURTZMAN [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	ROSENBERGER V. RECTOR & VISITORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA [Concurrence]
	SANTA FE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. V. DOE [Syllabus]
	LEMON V. KURTZMAN [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES V. SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES CONTROL BD. NO. 12 [Opinion]
	LEE V. WEISMAN [Syllabus]
	LYNCH V. DONNELLY [Syllabus]
	MUELLER V. ALLEN [Dissent]
	MARSH V. CHAMBERS [Syllabus]
	BOARD OF EDUC. OF KIRYAS JOEL VILLAGE SCH. DIST. V. GRUMET, 114 S. CT. 2481, [Syllabus]
	VAN ORDEN V. PERRY [Syllabus]
	LEE V. WEISMAN, 505 U.S. 577 (1992). [Syllabus]
	BOARD OF EDUCATION OF WESTSIDE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS V. MERGENS BY AND THROUGH MERGENS [Concurrence]
	EMPLOYMENT DIVISION V. SMITH [Dissent]
	ILLINOIS EX REL. MCCOLLUM V. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF SCHOOL DISTRICT [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	BOARD OF EDUCATION V. ALLEN [Dissent]
	WELSH V. UNITED STATES [Concurrence]
	WIDMAR V. VINCENT [Syllabus]
	BOB JONES UNIV. V. UNITED STATES [Opinion]
	REID V. COVERT [Concurrence]
	ADKINS V. CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL [Opinion]
	ZORACH V. CLAUSON [Opinion]
	WEBSTER V. REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	SCOTT V. SANDFORD [Concurrence]
	WEBSTER V. REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	CITY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER V. MANHART [Opinion]
	ESTATE OF THORNTON V. CALDOR, INC. [Opinion]
	ZELMAN V. SIMMONS-HARRIS [Syllabus] Ohio's Pilot Project Scholarship Program, which provides, inter alia, tuition aid for Cleveland schoolchildren to attend a participating public or private, religious or nonreligious, school of their parent's choosing, does not offend the Establishment Clause.
	ZOBREST V. CATALINA FOOTHILLS SCH. DIST., 509 U.S. 1 (1993). [Syllabus]
	CUTTER V. WILKINSON [Syllabus]
	ADKINS V. CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL [Dissent]
	CIVIL RIGHTS CASES [Dissent]
	ZELMAN V. SIMMONS-HARRIS [Syllabus]
	MISSOURI EX REL. GAINES V. CANADA [Opinion]
	MYERS V. UNITED STATES [Opinion]
	MCDANIEL V. PATY [Syllabus]
	YOUNG V. AMERICAN MINI THEATRES, INC. [Opinion]
	VALLEY FORGE CHRISTIAN COLLEGE V. AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE, INC. [Syllabus]
	AGUILAR V. FELTON [Syllabus]
	ARIZONA GOVERNING COMMITTEE FOR TAX DEFERRED ANNUITY AND DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLANS V. NORRIS [Concurrence]
	GLIDDEN CO. V. ZDANOK [Opinion]
	UNITED STATES V. PINK [Opinion]
	SCOTT V. SANDFORD [Opinion]
	THOMAS V. REVIEW BOARD OF THE INDIANA EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DIVISION [Opinion]
	POSTAL SERVICE V. FLAMINGO INDUSTRIES (USA) LTD. [Syllabus] The federal antitrust laws apply to a person, which is defined to include corporations and associations existing under or authorized by the laws of * * * the United States. 15 U.S.C.7 (sherman Act), 12 (a) (Clayton Act). The question presented is whether the United States Postal Service is a person amenable to suit under the antitrust laws.
	ERIE V. PAP’S A. M. [Syllabus] Did the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, the court of last resort of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, improperly strike an ordinance of the City of Erie which fully comports with the principles articulated in Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc., thereby willfully disregarding binding precedent in violation of the Supremacy Clause at Article VI, Clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States?
	LOCKE V. DAVEY [Syllabus] The Washington Constitution provides that no public money shall be appropriated or applied to religious instruction. Following this constitutional command, Washington does not grant college scholarships to otherwise eligible students who are pursuing a degree in theology. Does the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment require the state to fund religious instruction, if it provides college scholarships for secular instruction?
	BAILEY V. DREXEL FURNITURE COMPANY [Opinion]
	BOWSHER V. SYNAR [Concurrence]
	MILLIKEN V. BRADLEY [Opinion]
	STONE V. GRAHAM [Dissent]
	SCHAD V. BOROUGH OF MOUNT EPHRAIM [Opinion]
	SCHLESINGER V. RESERVISTS COMMITTEE TO STOP THE WAR [Dissent]
	MUELLER V. ALLEN [Syllabus]
	EPPERSON V. ARKANSAS [Concurrence]
	RENO V. ACLU [Concurrence]
	BOARD OF DIRECTORS, ROTARY INTERNATIONAL V. ROTARY CLUB OF DUARTE [Opinion]
	WEST VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION V. BARNETTE [Dissent]
	WALLACE V. JAFFREE [Syllabus]
	NORTHERN PIPELINE CONSTR. CO. V. MARATHON PIPE LINE CO. [Opinion]
	DAMES & MOORE V. REGAN [Opinion]
	EPPERSON V. ARKANSAS [Opinion]
	CHEROKEE NATION V. GEORGIA [Dissent]
	SAN ANTONIO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT V. RODRIGUEZ [Opinion]
	SCOTT V. SANDFORD [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	ELK GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST. V. NEWDOW [Syllabus] (1) Whether Michael Newdow has standing to challenge as unconstitutional a public school district policy that requires teachers to lead willing students in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance? (2) Whether a public school district policy that requires teachers to lead willing students in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, which includes the words "under God," violates the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment, as applicable through the 14th Amendment?
	LOS ANGELES V. ALAMEDA BOOKS, INC. [Syllabus] The Ninth Circuit's judgment striking down a Los Angeles ordinance banning multiple-use adult entertainment establishments under Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc., 475 U. S. 41, is reversed, and the case is remanded.
	HIBBS V. WINN [Syllabus]
	WIDMAR V. VINCENT [Concurrence]
	UNITED STATES V. PETERS [Syllabus]
	ILLINOIS EX REL. MCCOLLUM V. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF SCHOOL DISTRICT [Opinion]
	EPPERSON V. ARKANSAS [Syllabus]
	ROSTKER V. GOLDBERG [Dissent]
	A. L. A. SCHECHTER POULTRY CORP. V. UNITED STATES [Opinion]
	HURTADO V. CALIFORNIA [Dissent]
	ENGEL V. VITALE [Dissent]
	ALLEN V. WRIGHT [Opinion]
	DENNIS V. UNITED STATES [Concurrence]
	WIENER V. UNITED STATES [Opinion]
	LLOYD CORP., LTD. V. TANNER [Opinion]
	TRUSTEES OF DARTMOUTH COLLEGE V. WOODWARD [Concurrence]
	PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA V. CASEY [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	MYERS V. UNITED STATES [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	TRUSTEES OF DARTMOUTH COLLEGE V. WOODWARD [Syllabus]
	SELECTIVE DRAFT LAW CASES [Opinion]
	PACIFIC STATES TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY V. OREGON [Opinion]
	UNITED STATES TRUST COMPANY OF NEW YORK V. NEW JERSEY [Opinion]
	HAMPTON V. MOW SUN WONG [Opinion]
	EDWARDS V. AGUILLARD [Syllabus]
	MUNN V. ILLINOIS [Opinion]
	CITY OF MEMPHIS V. GREENE [Dissent]
	BOWEN V. ROY [Opinion]
	BOWEN V. ROY [Concurrence]
	CHISHOLM V. GEORGIA [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	SCHOOL DISTRICT V. BALL [Syllabus]
	DESHANEY V. WINNEBAGO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES [Dissent]
	EX PARTE GARLAND [Dissent]
	SCHOOL DISTRICT V. BALL [Dissent]
	ESTATE OF THORNTON V. CALDOR, INC. [Concurrence]
	LUTHER V. BORDEN [Dissent]
	PLESSY V. FERGUSON [Opinion]
	LOCHNER V. NEW YORK [Opinion]
	WILSON V. NEW [Opinion]
	SCHOOL DISTRICT OF ABINGTON TOWNSHIP, PENNSYLVANIA V. SCHEMPP [Concurrence]
	MISSISSIPPI UNIVERSITY FOR WOMEN V. HOGAN [Opinion]
	JOHNSON V. ROBISON [Opinion]
	SCHOOL DISTRICT V. BALL [Concurrence]
	STONE V. GRAHAM [Syllabus]
	LEMON V. KURTZMAN [Syllabus]
	ASHWANDER V. TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES V. USERY [Dissent]
	THOMAS V. REVIEW BOARD OF THE INDIANA EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DIVISION [Syllabus]
	SCALES V. UNITED STATES [Opinion]
	ILLINOIS V. GATES [Syllabus]
	PENNHURST STATE SCHOOL AND HOSPITAL V. HALDERMAN [Opinion]
	PLESSY V. FERGUSON [Dissent]
	EVERSON V. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF EWING [Dissent]
	VILLAGE OF EUCLID V. AMBLER REALTY CO. [Opinion]
	SHERBERT V. VERNER [Opinion]
	MCCLESKEY V. KEMP [Dissent]
	INS V. CHADHA [Dissent]
	BOARD OF EDUC. V. PICO [Dissent]
	CHURCH OF LUKUMI BABALU AYE, INC. V. CITY OF HIALEAH [Concurrence]
	WATKINS V. UNITED STATES [Opinion]
	WALZ V. TAX COMM'N OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK []
	YICK WO V. HOPKINS [Syllabus]
	EVANS V. ABNEY [Opinion]
	MCCULLOCH V. MARYLAND [Opinion]
	BOARD OF EDUCATION V. ALLEN [Syllabus]
	ZELMAN V. SIMMONS-HARRIS [Dissent]
	PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA V. CASEY [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	ESTATE OF THORNTON V. CALDOR, INC. [Syllabus]
	EPPERSON V. ARKANSAS [Concurrence]
	SLAUGHTERHOUSE CASES [Opinion]
	PROPRIETORS OF CHARLES RIVER BRIDGE V. PROPRIETORS OF WARREN BRIDGE [Dissent]
	NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE V. CLAIBORNE HARDWARE CO. [Opinion]
	WELSH V. UNITED STATES [Syllabus]
	MILLIKEN V. BRADLEY [Dissent]
	MILLIKEN V. BRADLEY [Concurrence]
	PRUNEYARD SHOPPING CENTER V. ROBINS [Opinion]
	YOUNG V. AMERICAN MINI THEATRES, INC. [Concurrence]
	WORCESTER V. GEORGIA [Opinion]
	YOUNGSTOWN SHEET & TUBE CO. V. SAWYER [Concurrence]
	BARNES V. GLEN THEATRE, INC. [Concurrence]
	EDWARDS V. AGUILLARD [Concurrence]
	UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO-CLC V. WEBER [Dissent]
	LOCHNER V. NEW YORK [Dissent]
	ALDEN V. MAINE [Dissent]
	GUINN & BEAL V. UNITED STATES [Opinion]
	AMALGAMATED FOOD EMPLOYEES UNION LOCAL 590 V. LOGAN VALLEY PLAZA, INC. [Opinion]
	CHURCH OF THE LUKUMI BABALU AYE V. CITY OF HIALEAH, 508 U.S. 520 (1993). [Syllabus]
	GOOD SAMARITAN HOSP. V. SHALALA, 508 U.S. 402 (1993). [Syllabus]
	LAMB'S CHAPEL V. CTR. MORICHES UNION FREE SCH. DIST., 508 U.S. 384 (1993). [Syllabus]
	LEBRON V. NATIONAL R.R. PASSENGER CORP., 513 U.S. 374 (1995). [Syllabus]
	SOUTH DAKOTA V. BOURLAND, 508 U.S. 679 (1993). [Syllabus]
	HUBBARD V. UNITED STATES, 514 U.S. 695 (1995). [Syllabus]
	SPRIETSMA V. MERCURY MARINE [Syllabus] A state common-law tort action seeking damages from the manufacturer of an outboard motor is not pre-empted by the enactment of the Federal Boat Safety Act of 1971 or by the Coast Guard's decision not to promulgate a regulation requiring propeller guards on motorboats.
	DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION V. PUBLICCITIZEN [Syllabus] Whether a presidential foreign-affairs action that is otherwise exempt from environmental-review requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., and Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7506(c)(1), became subject to those requirements because an executive agency promulgated administrative rules concerning implementation of the President's action?
	CITY NEWS & NOVELTY, INC. V. WAUKESHA [Syllabus] Is a licensing scheme which acts as a prior restraint required to contain explicit language which prevents injury to a speaker's rights from want of a prompt judicial decision?"
	WACHOVIA BANK, N. A. V. SCHMIDT [Syllabus]
	UNITED STATES V. ALASKA, 503 U.S. 569 (1992). [Syllabus]
	TUAN ANH NGUYEN V. INS [Syllabus] Title 8 U. S. C. §1409, which provides different citizenship rules for children born abroad and out of wedlock to one United States citizen and one noncitizen depending on whether the citizen parent is the mother or the father, is consistent with the equal protection guarantee embedded in the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause.
	METROMEDIA, INC. V. CITY OF SAN DIEGO [Opinion]
	EMPLOYMENT DIVISION V. SMITH [Opinion]
	HAMMER V. DAGENHART [Opinion]
	CABELL V. CHAVEZ-SALIDO [Opinion]
	MILLIKEN V. BRADLEY [Dissent]
	UNITED STATES V. FORDICE [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	YATES V. UNITED STATES [Dissent]
	SCALES V. UNITED STATES [Dissent]
	CARTER V. CARTER COAL CO. [Opinion]
	PATTON V. UNITED STATES [Opinion]
	NIXON V. ADMINISTRATOR OF GENERAL SERVICES [Dissent]
	REID V. COVERT [Dissent]
	JOHNSON V. TRANSPORTATION AGENCY [Dissent]
	ZORACH V. CLAUSON [Dissent]
	PROPRIETORS OF CHARLES RIVER BRIDGE V. PROPRIETORS OF WARREN BRIDGE [Syllabus]
	CANTWELL V. CONNECTICUT [Syllabus]
	OLIVER V. UNITED STATES [Dissent]
	UNITED STATES V. JACKSON [Opinion]
	BOARD OF EDUCATION V. ALLEN [Dissent]
	ILLINOIS EX REL. MCCOLLUM V. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF SCHOOL DISTRICT [Concurrence]
	FORD V. WAINWRIGHT [Opinion]
	BAILEY V. DREXEL FURNITURE COMPANY [Syllabus]
	OREGON V. MITCHELL [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	DOE V. MCMILLAN [Opinion]
	GREER V. SPOCK [Dissent]
	MAHAN V. HOWELL [Syllabus]
	NORTHERN PIPELINE CONSTR. CO. V. MARATHON PIPE LINE CO. [Syllabus]
	UNITED STATES. RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD V. FRITZ [Opinion]
	CABELL V. CHAVEZ-SALIDO [Dissent]
	WALLER V. FLORIDA [Opinion]
	MINERSVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT V. BOARD OF EDUCATION [Opinion]
	CIVIL RIGHTS CASES [Opinion]
	UNITED STATES V. QUARLES [Dissent]
	POWELL V. MCCORMACK []
	MIAMI HERALD PUBLISHING CO. V. TORNILLO [Opinion]
	BOOS V. BARRY [Concurrence]
	PROPRIETORS OF CHARLES RIVER BRIDGE V. PROPRIETORS OF WARREN BRIDGE [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	CLINTON V. JONES [Opinion]
	GITLOW V. PEOPLE [Opinion]
	SEMINOLE TRIBE OF FLORIDA V. FLORIDA [Dissent]
	POLLOCK V. FARMERS' LOAN AND TRUST COMPANY [Opinion]
	EVERSON V. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF EWING [Syllabus]
	MOOSE LODGE NO. 107 V. IRVIS [Dissent]
	RUTAN V. REPUBLICAN PARTY OF ILLINOIS [Dissent]
	COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES V. SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES CONTROL BD. NO. 12 [Dissent]
	WEST COAST HOTEL CO. V. PARRISH [Syllabus]
	WHITNEY V. CALIFORNIA [Opinion]
	WALLACE V. JAFFREE [Dissent]
	ADAIR V. UNITED STATES [Opinion]
	BERGER V. NEW YORK [Concurrence]
	WEBSTER V. REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	MARTIN V. HUNTER'S LESSEE [Opinion]
	LAMB'S CHAPEL V. CENTER MORICHES UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT [Syllabus]
	ENGEL V. VITALE [Syllabus]
	UNITED STATES V. KLEIN [Opinion]
	ADAMSON V. CALIFORNIA [Dissent]
	TYSON & BROTHER V. BANTON [Opinion]
	OREGON V. MITCHELL [Opinion]
	MAXWELL V. DOW [Dissent]
	BOWSHER V. SYNAR [Dissent]
	UNITED STATES V. FORDICE [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	KIRKPATRICK V. PREISLER [Syllabus]
	OREGON V. MITCHELL [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	PRIZE CASES [Opinion]
	MULFORD V. SMITH [Opinion]
	GUINN & BEAL V. UNITED STATES [Syllabus]
	POLLOCK V. FARMERS' LOAN AND TRUST COMPANY [Dissent]
	SAENZ V. ROE [Opinion]
	SHELLEY V. KRAEMER [Opinion]
	SCHLESINGER V. RESERVISTS COMMITTEE TO STOP THE WAR [Dissent]
	UNITED STATES V. BELMONT [Opinion]
	SEMINOLE TRIBE OF FLORIDA V. FLORIDA [Dissent]
	OREGON V. MITCHELL [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	NGUYEN V. INS [Opinion]
	KENT V. DULLES [Dissent]
	NGUYEN V. INS [Syllabus]
	RUST V. SULLIVAN [Opinion]
	SCOTT V. SANDFORD [Dissent]
	MUNN V. ILLINOIS [Dissent]
	JACOBELLIS V. OHIO [Opinion]
	UNITED STATES V. PINK [Dissent]
	IN RE NEAGLE [Dissent]
	LAMB'S CHAPEL V. CENTER MORICHES UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT [Concurrence]
	SHERBERT V. VERNER [Concurrence]
	C & A CARBONE, INC. V. TOWN OF CLARKSTOWN [Concurrence]
	PRUNEYARD SHOPPING CENTER V. ROBINS [Concurrence]
	LYNG V. NORTHWEST INDIAN CEMETERY PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION [Opinion]
	SCOTT V. SANDFORD [Dissent]
	FLETCHER V. PECK [Syllabus]
	SCHAD V. BOROUGH OF MOUNT EPHRAIM [Syllabus]
	GREER V. SPOCK [Opinion]
	BARRON V. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE [Syllabus]
	DOTHARD V. RAWLINSON [Concurrence]
	STANDARD OIL CO. OF NEW JERSEY V. UNITED STATES [Opinion]
	LUCAS V. SOUTH CAROLINA COASTAL COUNCIL [Opinion]
	COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES V. SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES CONTROL BD. NO. 12 [Dissent]
	YOUNGSTOWN SHEET & TUBE CO. V. SAWYER [Dissent]
	YOUNG V. AMERICAN MINI THEATRES, INC. [Syllabus]
	GERTZ V. ROBERT WELCH, INC. [Dissent]
	WISCONSIN V. YODER [Concurrence]
	SAENZ V. ROE [Dissent]
	GRISWOLD V. CONNECTICUT [Dissent]
	MARSH V. CHAMBERS [Dissent]
	TROP V. DULLES [Concurrence]
	UNITED STATES V. QUARLES [Opinion]
	NGUYEN V. INS [Dissent]
	SCHNECKLOTH V. BUSTAMONTE [Concurrence]
	MOOSE LODGE NO. 107 V. IRVIS [Opinion]
	UNITED STATES V. E. C. KNIGHT COMPANY [Opinion]
	ZORACH V. CLAUSON [Syllabus]
	ROMER V. EVANS [Dissent]
	SCHOOL DISTRICT V. BALL [Dissent]
	SAENZ V. ROE [Dissent]
	HOLDEN V. HARDY [Opinion]
	UNITED STATES V. WONG KIM ARK [Opinion]
	MISSISSIPPI UNIVERSITY FOR WOMEN V. HOGAN [Syllabus]
	YATES V. UNITED STATES [Opinion]
	MIRANDA V. ARIZONA [Dissent]
	BARENBLATT V. UNITED STATES [Opinion]
	SHERBERT V. VERNER [Syllabus]
	CHEROKEE NATION V. GEORGIA [Syllabus]
	COHENS V. VIRGINIA [Opinion]
	STRAUDER V. WEST VIRGINIA [Opinion]
	BOARD OF DIRECTORS, ROTARY INTERNATIONAL V. ROTARY CLUB OF DUARTE [Syllabus]
	SCHOOL DISTRICT V. BALL [Concurrence]
	HARRIS V. MCRAE [Syllabus]
	LOCHNER V. NEW YORK [Syllabus]
	HAGUE V. COMMITTEE FOR INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	FURMAN V. GEORGIA [Concurrence]
	PENNOYER V. NEFF [Dissent]
	REID V. COVERT [Opinion]
	MORRISON V. OLSON [Opinion]
	FUENTES V. SHEVIN [Opinion]
	UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO-CLC V. WEBER [Opinion]
	HUDGENS V. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD [Dissent]
	PATTERSON V. MCLEAN CREDIT UNION [Syllabus]
	COHENS V. VIRGINIA [Syllabus]
	KEYISHIAN V. BOARD OF REGENTS [Dissent]
	MULLER V. OREGON [Opinion]
	MAHER V. ROE [Opinion]
	METROMEDIA, INC. V. CITY OF SAN DIEGO [Dissent]
	OREGON V. MITCHELL [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	BUTZ V. ECONOMOU [Opinion]
	TINKER V. DES MOINES INDEPENDENT COMMUNITY SCHOOL DIST. [Dissent]
	MAHAN V. HOWELL [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	BARENBLATT V. UNITED STATES [Dissent]
	SLAUGHTERHOUSE CASES [Syllabus]
	DANDRIDGE V. WILLIAMS [Dissent]
	LYNG V. NORTHWEST INDIAN CEMETERY PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION [Dissent]
	MORGAN V. VIRGINIA [Dissent]
	CORNELIUS V. NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUC. FUND [Opinion]
	PALKO V. CONNECTICUT [Opinion]
	WEST COAST HOTEL CO. V. PARRISH [Dissent]
	DENNIS V. UNITED STATES [Concurrence]
	CHURCH OF LUKUMI BABALU AYE, INC. V. CITY OF HIALEAH [Syllabus]
	BURCH V. LOUISIANA [Opinion]
	OREGON V. MITCHELL [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	CRUZAN BY CRUZAN V. DIRECTOR, MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH [Opinion]
	BOARD OF EDUC. V. PICO [Opinion]
	OREGON V. MITCHELL [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	WALZ V. TAX COMM'N OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK [Syllabus]
	AMALGAMATED FOOD EMPLOYEES UNION LOCAL 590 V. LOGAN VALLEY PLAZA, INC. [Dissent]
	TWINING V. STATE [Opinion]
	AMALGAMATED FOOD EMPLOYEES UNION LOCAL 590 V. LOGAN VALLEY PLAZA, INC. [Dissent]
	BOARD OF REGENTS OF STATE COLLEGES V. ROTH [Dissent]
	REGENTS OF THE UNIV. OF CAL. V. BAKKE [Opinion]
	NORTHERN PIPELINE CONSTR. CO. V. MARATHON PIPE LINE CO. []
	PEREZ V. BROWNELL [Dissent]
	AGUILAR V. FELTON [Dissent]
	GREEN V. COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF NEW KENT COUNTY [Opinion]
	NEBBIA V. NEW YORK [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	THORNHILL V. ALABAMA [Opinion]
	RUST V. SULLIVAN [Dissent]
	TRUSTEES OF DARTMOUTH COLLEGE V. WOODWARD [Opinion]
	WEBSTER V. REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES V. USERY [Opinion]
	HADLEY V. JUNIOR COLLEGE DISTRICT OF METROPOLITAN KANSAS CITY [Dissent]
	REYNOLDS V. SIMS [Opinion]
	SLAUGHTERHOUSE CASES [Dissent]
	BERGER V. NEW YORK [Dissent]
	AGUILAR V. FELTON [Dissent]
	GOLDMAN V. WEINBERGER [Dissent]
	GOLDMAN V. WEINBERGER [Concurrence]
	WARD'S COVE PACKING CO., INC. V. ANTONIO [Dissent]
	WOODS V. CLOYD W. MILLER CO. [Opinion]
	MISSISSIPPI UNIVERSITY FOR WOMEN V. HOGAN [Dissent]
	EVANS V. NEWTON [Dissent]
	SCHOOL DISTRICT OF ABINGTON TOWNSHIP, PENNSYLVANIA V. SCHEMPP [Syllabus]
	BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA V. DALE [Opinion]
	CANTWELL V. CONNECTICUT [Opinion]
	GOLDMAN V. WEINBERGER [Dissent]
	UNITED STATES V. MORRISON [Opinion]
	HOBBIE V. UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMM'N OF FLORIDA [Syllabus]
	EVANS V. NEWTON [Opinion]
	EX PARTE QUIRIN [Opinion]
	MARSH V. ALABAMA [Dissent]
	GLOBE NEWSPAPER CO. V. SUPERIOR COURT [Opinion]
	UNITED STATES V. KAHN [Opinion]
	MAHAN V. HOWELL [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	ZURCHER V. STANFORD DAILY [Concurrence]
	MITCHELL V. HELMS [Syllabus] Whether a program under Chapter 2 of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, 20 U.S.C. 7301, et seq., which provides federal funds to state and local education agencies to purchase and lend neutral, secular, and nonreligious materials such as computers, software, and library books to public and nonpublic schools for use by the students attending those schools, and which allocates the funds on an equal per-student basis, regardless of the religious or secular character of the schools the students choose to attend, violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
	CAPITOL SQUARE REVIEW BD. V. PINETTE, 515 U.S. 753 (1995). [Syllabus]
	GOOD NEWS CLUB V. MILFORD CENTRAL SCHOOL [Syllabus] When Milford Central School excluded the Good News Club from meeting after hours at the school on the ground that the Club was religious in nature, it violated the Club's free speech rights; that violation is not justified by Milford's concern that permitting the Club's activities would violate the Establishment Clause.
	ROSENBERGER V. UNIVERSITY OF VA., 515 U.S. 819 (1995). [Syllabus]
	LEE V. WEISMAN, 505 U.S. 577 (1992). [Syllabus]
	LOCKE V. DAVEY [Syllabus] The Washington Constitution provides that no public money shall be appropriated or applied to religious instruction. Following this constitutional command, Washington does not grant college scholarships to otherwise eligible students who are pursuing a degree in theology. Does the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment require the state to fund religious instruction, if it provides college scholarships for secular instruction?
	CUTTER V. WILKINSON [Syllabus]
	LAMB'S CHAPEL V. CTR. MORICHES UNION FREE SCH. DIST., 508 U.S. 384 (1993). [Syllabus]
	ZOBREST V. CATALINA FOOTHILLS SCH. DIST., 509 U.S. 1 (1993). [Syllabus]
	CHURCH OF THE LUKUMI BABALU AYE V. CITY OF HIALEAH, 508 U.S. 520 (1993). [Syllabus]
	HIBBS V. WINN [Syllabus]
	ELK GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST. V. NEWDOW [Syllabus] (1) Whether Michael Newdow has standing to challenge as unconstitutional a public school district policy that requires teachers to lead willing students in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance? (2) Whether a public school district policy that requires teachers to lead willing students in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, which includes the words "under God," violates the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment, as applicable through the 14th Amendment?
	HEIN V. FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUNDATION, INC. [Syllabus]
	AGOSTINI V. FELTON, 117 S.CT. 1997, 138 L.ED.2D 391 (1997). [Syllabus]
	MCCREARY COUNTY V. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIESUNION OF KY. [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	SANTA FE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. V. DOE [Syllabus] Whether petitioner's policy permitting student-led, student-initiated prayer at football games violates the Establishment Clause."
	BOARD OF EDUC. OF KIRYAS JOEL VILLAGE SCH. DIST. V. GRUMET, 114 S. CT. 2481, [Syllabus]
	VAN ORDEN V. PERRY [Syllabus]
	ZELMAN V. SIMMONS-HARRIS [Syllabus] Ohio's Pilot Project Scholarship Program, which provides, inter alia, tuition aid for Cleveland schoolchildren to attend a participating public or private, religious or nonreligious, school of their parent's choosing, does not offend the Establishment Clause.
	CITY OF BOERNE V. FLORES, 117 S.CT. 2157, 138 L.ED.2D 624 (1997). [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	ERIE V. PAP’S A. M. [Syllabus] Did the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, the court of last resort of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, improperly strike an ordinance of the City of Erie which fully comports with the principles articulated in Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc., thereby willfully disregarding binding precedent in violation of the Supremacy Clause at Article VI, Clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States?
	POSTAL SERVICE V. FLAMINGO INDUSTRIES (USA) LTD. [Syllabus] The federal antitrust laws apply to a person, which is defined to include corporations and associations existing under or authorized by the laws of * * * the United States. 15 U.S.C.7 (sherman Act), 12 (a) (Clayton Act). The question presented is whether the United States Postal Service is a person amenable to suit under the antitrust laws.
	WATCHTOWER BIBLE & TRACT SOC. OF N. Y., INC. V.VILLAGE OF STRATTON [Syllabus] A village ordinance making it a misdemeanor to engage in door-to-door advocacy without first registering with the mayor and receiving a permit violates the First Amendment as it applies to religious proselytizing, anonymous political speech, and the distribution of handbills.
	LOS ANGELES V. ALAMEDA BOOKS, INC. [Syllabus] The Ninth Circuit's judgment striking down a Los Angeles ordinance banning multiple-use adult entertainment establishments under Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc., 475 U. S. 41, is reversed, and the case is remanded.
	GOOD SAMARITAN HOSP. V. SHALALA, 508 U.S. 402 (1993). [Syllabus]
	LEBRON V. NATIONAL R.R. PASSENGER CORP., 513 U.S. 374 (1995). [Syllabus]
	TUAN ANH NGUYEN V. INS [Syllabus] Title 8 U. S. C. §1409, which provides different citizenship rules for children born abroad and out of wedlock to one United States citizen and one noncitizen depending on whether the citizen parent is the mother or the father, is consistent with the equal protection guarantee embedded in the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause.
	SOUTH DAKOTA V. BOURLAND, 508 U.S. 679 (1993). [Syllabus]
	HUBBARD V. UNITED STATES, 514 U.S. 695 (1995). [Syllabus]
	WACHOVIA BANK, N. A. V. SCHMIDT [Syllabus]
	SPRIETSMA V. MERCURY MARINE [Syllabus] A state common-law tort action seeking damages from the manufacturer of an outboard motor is not pre-empted by the enactment of the Federal Boat Safety Act of 1971 or by the Coast Guard's decision not to promulgate a regulation requiring propeller guards on motorboats.
	DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION V. PUBLICCITIZEN [Syllabus] Whether a presidential foreign-affairs action that is otherwise exempt from environmental-review requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., and Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7506(c)(1), became subject to those requirements because an executive agency promulgated administrative rules concerning implementation of the President's action?
	CITY NEWS & NOVELTY, INC. V. WAUKESHA [Syllabus] Is a licensing scheme which acts as a prior restraint required to contain explicit language which prevents injury to a speaker's rights from want of a prompt judicial decision?"
	UNITED STATES V. ALASKA, 503 U.S. 569 (1992). [Syllabus]