| Type
|
Case
|
Citation
|
Issues
|
Joined by
|
Other opinions
|
101
|
Chickasaw Nation v. United States
|
534 U.S. 84 (2001)
|
|
Rehnquist, Stevens, Kennedy, Ginsburg; Scalia, Thomas (in part)
|
|
|
|
402
|
J. E. M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc.
|
534 U.S. 124 (2001)
|
|
Stevens
|
|
|
|
103
|
Kansas v. Crane
|
534 U.S. 407 (2002)
|
|
Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg
|
|
|
|
504
|
Overton v. Ohio
|
534 U.S. 982 (2001)
|
|
Stevens, O'Connor, Souter
|
|
| Breyer filed a statement respecting the Court's denial of certiorari.
|
405
|
Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. NLRB
|
535 U.S. 137 (2002)
|
|
Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg
|
|
|
|
406
|
Mickens v. Taylor
|
535 U.S. 162 (2002)
|
|
Ginsburg
|
|
|
|
107
|
Barnhart v. Walton
|
535 U.S. 212 (2002)
|
|
Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg; Scalia (in part)
|
|
|
|
408
|
Thompson v. Western States Medical Center
|
535 U.S. 357 (2002)
|
|
Rehnquist, Stevens, Ginsburg
|
|
|
|
109
|
US Airways, Inc. v. Barnett
|
535 U.S. 391 (2002)
|
|
Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor, Kennedy
|
|
|
|
310
|
Verizon Communications Inc. v. FCC
|
535 U.S. 467 (2002)
|
|
Scalia (in part)
|
|
|
|
211
|
Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union
|
535 U.S. 564 (2002)
|
|
|
|
|
|
112
|
Lapides v. Board of Regents of Univ. System of Ga.
|
535 U.S. 613 (2002)
|
|
Unanimous
|
|
|
|
413
|
Federal Maritime Comm'n v. South Carolina Ports Authority
|
535 U.S. 743 (2002)
|
|
Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg
|
|
|
|
414
|
Williams v. United States
|
535 U.S. 911 (2002)
|
|
Scalia, Kennedy
|
|
| Breyer dissented from the Court's denial of certiorari.
|
415
|
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
|
535 U.S. 1157 (2002)
|
Criminal procedure • Confrontation Clause
|
O'Connor
|
|
| Breyer filed a dissent from the Court's decision not to transmit to Congress proposed amendments to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 26(b), which would have permitted witness testimony via two-way video transmission. Breyer disagreed with the majority's concerns that the proposed rule was unconstitutional under the Sixth Amendment, and noted that transmittal of the rule would not constitute a judgment by the Court that it was constitutional. Instead, "rather than consider the constitutional matter in the context of a defendant who objects, the Court denies all litigants—prosecutors and consenting defendants alike—the benefits of advances in modern technology. And it thereby deprives litigants, judges, and the public of technology that will help to create trial procedures that are both more efficient and more fair."
|
216
|
Watchtower Bible & Tract Soc. of N. Y., Inc. v. Village of Stratton
|
536 U.S. 150 (2002)
|
|
Souter, Ginsburg
|
|
|
|
117
|
Carey v. Saffold
|
536 U.S. 214 (2002)
|
|
Stevens, O'Connor, Souter, Ginsburg
|
|
|
|
118
|
United States v. Fior D'Italia, Inc.
|
536 U.S. 238 (2002)
|
|
Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor, Kennedy, Ginsburg
|
|
|
|
219
|
Gonzaga University v. Doe
|
536 U.S. 273 (2002)
|
|
Souter
|
|
|
|
120
|
Utah v. Evans
|
536 U.S. 452 (2002)
|
|
Rehnquist, Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg; O'Connor (in part)
|
|
|
|
221
|
BE&K Construction Co. v. NLRB
|
536 U.S. 516 (2002)
|
|
Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg
|
|
|
|
222
|
Harris v. United States
|
536 U.S. 545 (2002)
|
|
|
|
|
|
223
|
Ring v. Arizona
|
536 U.S. 584 (2002)
|
|
|
|
|
|
124
|
United States v. Ruiz
|
536 U.S. 622 (2002)
|
|
Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg
|
|
|
|
425
|
Zelman v. Simmons-Harris
|
536 U.S. 639 (2002)
|
|
Stevens, Souter
|
|
|
|
226
|
Board of Ed. of Independent School Dist. No. 92 of Pottawatomie Cty. v. Earls
|
536 U.S. 822 (2002)
|
|
|
|
|
|
