Home Menu ↓
Supreme Court Case List - Upcoming Arguments and Arguments Not Yet Scheduled
 

Supreme Court Case List

Upcoming Arguments and Arguments Not Yet Scheduled

Below are listed upcoming Supreme Court cases. Cases scheduled for oral argument, and cases not yet scheduled are presented in separate lists.

Click on the Case Title for further details. Oral argument recordings, if available, may be heard or paused by clicking on the respective play or pause button next to the argument date. Oral argument transcripts may be in either PDF or text format. Link to them by clicking on the or images respectively. PDF documents for available opinions can be viewed by clicking on the image.

2016-02-10

The cases listed below have not yet been scheduled for argument.

Upcoming Cases Before the United States Supreme Court, Not Yet Scheduled for Argument
#Case TitleDocket No.CertiorariQuestions to be PresentedTerm
1Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association14-9152015-10-211. Whether Abood v. Detroit Bd. of Ed., 431 U.S. 209 (1977), should be overruled and public-sector "agency shop" arrangements invalidated under the First Amendment. 2. Whether it violates the First Amendment to require that public employees affirmatively object to subsidizing nonchargeable speech by public-sector unions, rather than requiring that employees affirmatively consent to subsidizing such speech.2015
2NAZARIAN v. PPL ENERGYPLUS14-6142015-10-191. When a seller offers to build generation and sell wholesale power on a fixed rate contract basis, does the FPA field-preempt a state order directing retail utilities to enter into the contract? 2. Does FERC's acceptance of an annual regional capacity auction preempt states from requiring retail utilities to contract at fixed rates with sellers who are willing to commit to sell into the auction on a long-term basis?2015
3CPV MARYLAND v. PPL ENERGYPLUS14-6232015-10-192015
4HALO ELECTRONICS v. PULSE ELECTRONICS14-15132015-10-192015
5STRYKER CORPORATION v. ZIMMER14-15202015-10-191. Has the Federal Circuit improperly abrogated the plain meaning of 35 U.S.C. $ 284 by forbidding any award of enhanced damages unless there is a finding of willfulness under a rigid, two-part test, when this Court recently rejected an analogous framework imposed on 35 U.S.C. $ 285, the statute providing for attorneys' fee awards in exceptional cases? 2. Does a district court have discretion under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 to award enhanced damages where an infringer intentionally copied a direct competitor's patented invention, knew the invention was covered by multiple patents, and made no attempt to avoid infringing the patents on that invention?2015
6BANK MARKAZI v. PETERSON14-7702015-10-01Whether $8772 - a statute that effectively directs a particular result in a single pending case - violates the separation of powers.2015
7STURGEON v. MASICA14-12092015-10-012015
8UTAH v. STRIEFF14-13732015-10-012015
9AMERICOLD LOGISTICS v. CONAGRA FOODS14-13822015-10-012015
10NEBRASKA v. PARKER14-14062015-10-012015
11MHN GOVERNMENT SERVICES v. ZABOROWSKI14-14582015-10-012015
12DUNCAN v. OWENS14-15162015-10-012015
13TAYLOR v. UNITED STATES14-61662015-10-012015
14MOLINA-MARTINEZ v. UNITED STATES14-89132015-10-012015
15PUERTO RICO v. SANCHEZ VALLE15-1082015-10-012015
16RJR NABISCO v. EUROPEAN COMMUNITY15-1382015-10-012015
17WILLIAMS v. PENNSYLVANIA15-50402015-10-01Are the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments violated by the participation of a potentially biased jurist on a multimember tribunal deciding a capital case, regardless of whether his vote is ultimately decisive?2015
18Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt14-11752015-06-301. Whether the federal discretionary-function immunity rule, 28 U.S.C. $2680(a), is categorically inapplicable to intentional torts and bad-faith conduct. 2. Whether Nevada may refuse to extend to sister States haled into Nevada courts the same immunities Nevada enjoys in those courts. 3. Whether Nevada v. Hall, 440 U.S. 410 (1979), which permits a sovereign State to be haled into the courts of another State without its consent, should be overruled.2015
19KINGDOMWARE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. UNITED STATES14-9162015-06-22Whether the Federal Circuit erred in construing 38 U.S.C. $ 8127(d)'s mandatory set-aside restricting competition for Department of Veterans Affairs' contracts to veteran-owned small businesses as discretionary.2015
20HEFFERNAN v. CITY OF PATERSON14-12800000-00-002015
21ZUBIK v. BURWELL, SEC. OF H&HS14-14180000-00-002015
22PRIESTS FOR LIFE v. DEPT. OF H&HS14-14530000-00-002015
23ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP v. BURWELL, SEC. OF H&HS14-15050000-00-002015
24E. TX BAPTIST UNIVERSITY v. BURWELL, SEC. OF H&HS15-3530000-00-002015
25LITTLE SISTERS v. BURWELL, SEC. OF H&HS15-10540000-00-002015
26SOUTHERN NAZARENE UNIVERSITY v. BURWELL, SEC. OF H&HS15-11940000-00-002015
27GENEVA COLLEGE v. BURWELL, SEC. OF H&HS15-19110000-00-002015
28VOISINE v. UNITED STATES14-101540000-00-002015
29SIMMONS v. HIMMELREICH15-1090000-00-002015
30HUSKY ELECTRONICS v. RITZ15-1450000-00-002015
31NICHOLS v. UNITED STATES15-52380000-00-002015
Themify WordPress Themes