Constitutional Law Reporter
Award
Menu
  • Home
  • US Constitution
  • Supreme Court Cases
  • Justices
    • Chief Supreme Court Justices
    • Current Supreme Court Justices
    • Past US Supreme Court Justices
  • American Biographies
    • General
    • Presidents
    • Vice-Presidents
    • First Ladies
    • Signers of the U.S. Constitution
    • Signers of the Declaration of Independence
    • Delegates of the U.S. Constitution
    • Misc – Great American Bios
  • Articles
    • Current Cases
    • Historical Cases
    • Impeachment
  • Videos
  • Links
Hot-Topics

March 31, 2026 | SCOTUS Rules 4th Circuit Erred in Granting New Trial in Klein v. Martin

Category: Supreme Court Decisions

Wayman v Southard

Ogden v Saunders: The Contracts Clause

In Ogden v Saunders, 25 U.S. 213 (1827), the U.S. Supreme Court held that a New York bankruptcy law did not violate the Constitution’s Contracts Clause. The case is also most remembered as the only decision from which Chief Justice John Marshall...

Read More
Dietz v Bouldin Recognizes Judge’s Limited Authority to Call Back Jury

Dietz v Bouldin Recognizes Judge’s Limited Authority to Call Back Jury

In Dietz v Bouldin, 579 U. S. ____ (2016), the U.S. Supreme Court held that the federal district court has a limited inherent power to rescind a jury discharge order and recall a jury in a civil case for further deliberations after identifying an err...

Read More
Martin V Mott 300x225

Wayman v Southard: The Limits of Non-delegation

In Wayman v Southard, 23 U.S. 10 Wheat. 1 1 (1825), the U.S. Supreme Court first grappled with the doctrine of non-delegation, under which one branch of government can’t delegate its constitutionally authorized power to another. In the decision, Ch...

Read More
Supreme Court Clarifies Speedy Trial Clause in Betterman v. Montana

Supreme Court Clarifies Speedy Trial Clause in Betterman v. Montana

In Betterman v. Montana, 578 U. S. ____ (2016), the U.S. Supreme Court clarified that the Sixth Amendment’s speedy trial guarantee does not apply once a defendant has been found guilty at trial or has pleaded guilty to criminal charges. The Court...

Read More
Osborn v Bank of the United States

Martin v. Mott: The President’s Power Under the Militia Clause

In Martin v. Mott, 25 U.S. 19 (1827), the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the Constitution’s Militia Clause. It held that the President, as commander in chief, has the unilateral power to call up state militias for duty during times of war.   ...

Read More
Court Remands Spokeo, Inc. v Robins to Ninth Circuit to Determine Standing

Court Remands Spokeo, Inc. v Robins to Ninth Circuit to Determine Standing

While Spokeo, Inc. v Robins, 578 U. S. ____ (2016), was one of the most anticipated decisions of the October 2016 Term, the U.S. Supreme Court ultimately remanded the case back to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to further address the issue of sta...

Read More
Sturges v Crowninshield

Osborn v Bank of the United States Clarifies Reach of Federal Jurisdiction

In Osborn v Bank of the United States, 22 US. (9 Wheat.) 738 (1824), the U.S. Supreme Court addressed Article III’s grant of judicial power over cases “arising under” federal law. In his opinion, Chief Justice John Marshall broadly interpreted...

Read More
United States v Hudson and Goodwin

Sturges v Crowninshield: Constitutionality of State Bankruptcy Laws

In Sturges v Crowninshield, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 122 (1819), the U.S. Supreme Court considered whether a New York bankruptcy law, and its retroactive application, were constitutional. The justices concluded that federal power over bankruptcy was not ex...

Read More
Voisine v United States: Domestic Violence Conviction Precludes Gun Ownership

Voisine v United States: Domestic Violence Conviction Precludes Gun Ownership

In Voisine v United States, 579 U. S. ____ (2016), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a federal law that prohibits individuals convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence offenses from owning a firearm. The majority rejected arguments that a reckless domes...

Read More
Commerce Clause Broad Interpretation in Taylor v United States

Commerce Clause Broad Interpretation in Taylor v United States

In Taylor v United States (2016), the U.S. Supreme Court held that “commerce” under the Hobbs Act should be interpreted broadly. Accordingly, it found that the government had satisfied its burden by establishing that the defendant robbed a drug d...

Read More
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 15
  4. 16
  5. 17
  6. 18
  7. 19
  8. 20
  9. 21
  10. 22
  11. 23
  12. 24
  13. 25
  14. 26
  15. 27
  16. 28
  17. 29
  18. 30
  19. 31
  20. 32
  21. 33
  22. 34
  23. 35
  24. ...
  25. 45

Previous Articles

SCOTUS Rejects Delaware Affidavit of Merit Requirement
by DONALD SCARINCI on March 12, 2026
SCOTUS Rejects Delaware Affidavit of Merit Requirement

In Berk v. Choy, 607 U.S. ____ (2026), the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that a Delaware law ...

Read More
Supreme Court Holds Candidate Can Challenge Election Law Governing Vote Counting
by DONALD SCARINCI on March 6, 2026
Supreme Court Holds Candidate Can Challenge Election Law Governing Vote Counting

In Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections, 607 U.S. ___ (2026), the U.S. Supreme Court held that...

Read More
Supreme Court Hold Ex Post Facto Clause Applies to Criminal Restitution Statute
by DONALD SCARINCI on
Supreme Court Hold Ex Post Facto Clause Applies to Criminal Restitution Statute

In Ellingburg v. United States, 607 U.S. ____ (2026), the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously heldthat t...

Read More
All Posts

The Amendments

  • Amendment1
    • Establishment ClauseFree Exercise Clause
    • Freedom of Speech
    • Freedoms of Press
    • Freedom of Assembly, and Petitition
    Read More
  • Amendment2
    • The Right to Bear Arms
    Read More
  • Amendment4
    • Unreasonable Searches and Seizures
    Read More
  • Amendment5
    • Due Process
    • Eminent Domain
    • Rights of Criminal Defendants
    Read More

Preamble to the Bill of Rights

Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

Read More

More Recent Posts

  • Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability of First Step Act to Vacated Sentences
  • SCOTUS Rules E-Cigarette Retailers Can Challenge FDA Order in Fifth Circuit
  • Supreme Court Expands Judicial Review of Agency Actions
  • Supreme Court Pauses Order Reinstating CPSC Commissioners

Constitutional Law Reporter Twitter

A Twitter List by S_H_Law

Constitutional Law Reporter RSS

donald scarinci constitutional law attorney

Editor

Donald Scarinci

Managing Partner

Scarinci Hollenbeck

(201) 806-3364

Awards


Follow me

© 2018 Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC. All rights reserved.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Attorney Advertising