Case at a Glance

In liquidations under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code, debtors must generally surrender their property for the benefit of creditors. Certain assets, however, are "exempt," that is, reserved for the debtor. This case asks the Court to decide whether the Code exempts Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) that permit withdrawals at any time, albeit subject to a tax penalty for debtors younger than 59 and ½ and in good health.

• Previewed by John P. Hennigan Jr., a professor of law at St. John's University School of Law in New York City.

Case Highlights
Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision

Case at a Glance

The state rested its case in Melvin Smith's jury trial for assault crimes and unlawful possession of a firearm, and his lawyer asked the judge to acquit on the firearm charge. She found him not guilty. But after Smith rested his case, the judge reversed her decision and sent the charge to the jury. Now Smith claims his resulting firearm conviction violated the Double Jeopardy Clause.

• Previewed by Michael Kaye, the director of the Center for Excellence in Advocacy and a professor of law at Washburn University School of Law in Topeka, Kansas.

Case Highlights
Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision

Case at a Glance

In 1994, the Court held that a prisoner cannot bring a § 1983 civil rights claim if success on that claim would invalidate the prisoner's conviction or sentence. Ever since, lower federal courts have debated what it means to "invalidate" a prior conviction or sentence, and in what context and to what extent this decision should bar prisoners' § 1983 claims. This case asks whether that bar applies when two prisoners' claims challenge state parole board procedures.

• Previewed by Mary Phelan D'Isa, a professor of law at the Thomas M. Cooley Law School in Lansing, Mich.

Case Highlights
Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision

Case at a Glance

In 1986, a Dallas County, Texas, jury convicted Thomas Joe Miller-El of murder and sentenced him to death. Miller-El claims that the prosecutors in his case exercised racial discrimination in the selection of his jury, but all state and federal courts to date have rejected his claim. Last year, the United States Supreme Court ordered the Court of Appeals to consider Miller-El=s appeal. It did so and ruled against him. Miller-El asserts that the federal trial and appellate courts in this habeas corpus action improperly applied existing precedent forbidding racial discrimination in the exercise of peremptory challenges.

• Previewed by Alan Raphael, an associate professor of Law at Loyola University Chicago School of Law in Chicago.

Case Highlights
Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision

Case at a Glance

The Supreme Court walks the narrow line between the implicit limitations against interstate economic discrimination placed on states by Article I's Commerce Clause and the seemingly explicit repeal of these limitations in Section 2 of the Twenty-first Amendment.

• Previewed by Will Trachman, a third-year student at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law (Boalt Hall), and Vikram David Amar, a professor of law at the University of California, Hastings College of Law.

Case Highlights
Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision

Case at a Glance

Special Trial Judges (STJs), judicial officers appointed by the chief judge of the United States Tax Court, are authorized by statute to hear but not to decide cases involving large tax deficiencies. A STJ who conducts the trial in such a case submits a report to the chief judge, who then assigns the case to a regular judge. In these cases, which involved both tax deficiencies and fraud penalties, the taxpayers are seeking disclosure of the STJ's report.

• Previewed by Leandra Lederman, a professor of law at George Mason University School of Law and the Visiting William W. Oliver Professor of Tax Law at Indiana University School of Law—Bloomington.

Case Highlights
Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision

Case at a Glance

Is beef more like mushrooms than peaches, plums and nectarines? This carries major constitutional and financial significance for beef producers across the country. That's because the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated a generic advertising assessment program for mushrooms in 2001 but upheld such a generic ad-assessment program for fruit in a 1997 case. In the two cases now before the Court, the respondent beef producers contend that they cannot be compelled to fund messages with which they disagree.

• Previewed by David L. Hudson Jr., a staff attorney with the First Amendment Center in Nashville, Tennessee.

Case Highlights
Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision

Case at a Glance

This case asks the Supreme Court to decide how long and in what manner police can detain persons found at a house that police are searching pursuant to a lawful warrant. The case may also explore what questioning the police may do of lawfully detained persons at such locations.

• Previewed by Mark M. Dobson, a professor of law at the Nova Southeastern University Law Center in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.

Case Highlights
Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision