RJR Nabisco v. The European Community, No. 15-138 3.21.16 Trans. / Aud. 6.20.2016



Holding: A violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act may be based on a pattern of racketeering that includes predicate offenses committed abroad, provided that each of those offenses violates a predicate statute that is itself extraterritorial. However, a private RICO plaintiff must allege and prove a domestic injury.

Wittman v. Personhuballah, No. 14-1504 03.21.16 Trans. / Aud. 5.23.2016



Holding: The appellants, members of Congress, who intervened to help defend Virginia’s 2013 congressional redistricting plan, lack standing to pursue an appeal of the district court’s holding that the plan was unconstitutional.

Acosta-Febo v. Franklin California Tax-Free Trust, No. 15-255 3.22.16 Trans. / Aud. 6.13.2016



Holding: Section 903(1) of the Bankruptcy Code, which pre-empts state bankruptcy laws that enable insolvent municipalities to restructure their debts over the objections of creditors and instead requires municipalities to restructure such debts under Chapter 9 of the federal Bankruptcy Code, pre-empts the Puerto Rico Public Corporation Debt Enforcement and Recovery Act, which was enacted to enable the commonwealth’s public utilities to implement a recovery or restructuring plan for their debt.

Simmons v. Himmelreich, No. 15-109 3.22.16 Trans. / Aud. 6.6.2016



Holding: The Federal Tort Claims Act's judgment bar provision does not apply to claims dismissed for falling within the FTCA's "exceptions" section.

Puerto Rico v. Franklin California Tax-Free Trust, No. 15-233 3.22.16 Trans. / Aud. 6.13.2016



Holding: Section 903(1) of the Bankruptcy Code, which pre-empts state bankruptcy laws that enable insolvent municipalities to restructure their debts over the objections of creditors and instead requires municipalities to restructure such debts under Chapter 9 of the federal Bankruptcy Code, pre-empts the Puerto Rico Public Corporation Debt Enforcement and Recovery Act, which was enacted to enable the commonwealth’s public utilities to implement a recovery or restructuring plan for their debt.

East Texas Baptist University v. Burwell, No. 15-35 3.23.16 Trans. / Aud. 5.16.2016



Holding: Because both the Obama administration and the religious non-profits, colleges, and schools challenging the accommodation offered to those who object to complying with the Affordable Care Act’s birth control mandate confirm that contraceptive coverage could be provided to the challengers’ female employees, through the challengers’ insurance companies, without any notice from the challengers, the decisions of the courts of appeals rejecting the challenge are vacated and remanded. Given the gravity of the dispute and the substantial clarification and refinement in the positions of the parties, the parties on remand should be afforded an opportunity to arrive at an approach going forward that accommodates the challengers’ religious exercise while at the same time ensuring that women covered by the challengers’ health plans receive full and equal health coverage, including contraceptive coverage.

Southern Nazarene University v. Burwell, No. 15-119 3.23.16 Trans. / Aud. 5.16.2016



Holding: Because both the Obama administration and the religious non-profits, colleges, and schools challenging the accommodation offered to those who object to complying with the Affordable Care Act’s birth control mandate confirm that contraceptive coverage could be provided to the challengers’ female employees, through the challengers’ insurance companies, without any notice from the challengers, the decisions of the courts of appeals rejecting the challenge are vacated and remanded. Given the gravity of the dispute and the substantial clarification and refinement in the positions of the parties, the parties on remand should be afforded an opportunity to arrive at an approach going forward that accommodates the challengers’ religious exercise while at the same time ensuring that women covered by the challengers’ health plans receive full and equal health coverage, including contraceptive coverage.

Roman Catholic Archbishop of Washington v. Burwell, No. 14-1505 3.23.16 Trans. / Aud. 5.16.2016



Holding: Because both the Obama administration and the religious non-profits, colleges, and schools challenging the accommodation offered to those who object to complying with the Affordable Care Act’s birth control mandate confirm that contraceptive coverage could be provided to the challengers’ female employees, through the challengers’ insurance companies, without any notice from the challengers, the decisions of the courts of appeals rejecting the challenge are vacated and remanded. Given the gravity of the dispute and the substantial clarification and refinement in the positions of the parties, the parties on remand should be afforded an opportunity to arrive at an approach going forward that accommodates the challengers’ religious exercise while at the same time ensuring that women covered by the challengers’ health plans receive full and equal health coverage, including contraceptive coverage.

Priests for Life v. Burwell, No. 14-1453 3.23.16 Trans. / Aud. 5.16.2016



Holding: Because both the Obama administration and the religious non-profits, colleges, and schools challenging the accommodation offered to those who object to complying with the Affordable Care Act’s birth control mandate confirm that contraceptive coverage could be provided to the challengers’ female employees, through the challengers’ insurance companies, without any notice from the challengers, the decisions of the courts of appeals rejecting the challenge are vacated and remanded. Given the gravity of the dispute and the substantial clarification and refinement in the positions of the parties, the parties on remand should be afforded an opportunity to arrive at an approach going forward that accommodates the challengers’ religious exercise while at the same time ensuring that women covered by the challengers’ health plans receive full and equal health coverage, including contraceptive coverage.

Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged v. Burwell, No. 15-105 3.23.16 Trans. / Aud. 5.16.2016



Holding: Because both the Obama administration and the religious non-profits, colleges, and schools challenging the accommodation offered to those who object to complying with the Affordable Care Act’s birth control mandate confirm that contraceptive coverage could be provided to the challengers’ female employees, through the challengers’ insurance companies, without any notice from the challengers, the decisions of the courts of appeals rejecting the challenge are vacated and remanded. Given the gravity of the dispute and the substantial clarification and refinement in the positions of the parties, the parties on remand should be afforded an opportunity to arrive at an approach going forward that accommodates the challengers’ religious exercise while at the same time ensuring that women covered by the challengers’ health plans receive full and equal health coverage, including contraceptive coverage.

Geneva College v. Burwell, No. 15-191 3.23.16 Trans. / Aud. 5.16.2016



Holding: Because both the Obama administration and the religious non-profits, colleges, and schools challenging the accommodation offered to those who object to complying with the Affordable Care Act’s birth control mandate confirm that contraceptive coverage could be provided to the challengers’ female employees, through the challengers’ insurance companies, without any notice from the challengers, the decisions of the courts of appeals rejecting the challenge are vacated and remanded. Given the gravity of the dispute and the substantial clarification and refinement in the positions of the parties, the parties on remand should be afforded an opportunity to arrive at an approach going forward that accommodates the challengers’ religious exercise while at the same time ensuring that women covered by the challengers’ health plans receive full and equal health coverage, including contraceptive coverage.

Zubik v. Burwell, No. 14-1418 3.23.16 Trans. / Aud. 5.16.2016



Holding: Because both the Obama administration and the religious non-profits, colleges, and schools challenging the accommodation offered to those who object to complying with the Affordable Care Act’s birth control mandate confirm that contraceptive coverage could be provided to the challengers’ female employees, through the challengers’ insurance companies, without any notice from the challengers, the decisions of the courts of appeals rejecting the challenge are vacated and remanded. Given the gravity of the dispute and the substantial clarification and refinement in the positions of the parties, the parties on remand should be afforded an opportunity to arrive at an approach going forward that accommodates the challengers’ religious exercise while at the same time ensuring that women covered by the challengers’ health plans receive full and equal health coverage, including contraceptive coverage.

CRST Van Expedited v. EEOC, No. 14-1375 3.28.16 Trans. / Aud. 5.19.2016



Holding: A favorable ruling on the merits is not a necessary predicate to find that a defendant is a prevailing party for purposes of an award of attorney’s fees under Section 706 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Betterman v. Montana, No. 14-1457 3.28.16 Trans. / Aud. 5.19.2016



Holding: 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.

Sheriff v. Gillie, No. 15-338 3.29.16 Trans. / Aud. 5.16.2016



Holding: Assuming, arguendo, that special counsel do not rank as "state officers" within the meaning of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, special counsel's use of the Ohio attorney general's letterhead in their efforts on behalf of the attorney general to collect debts owed to the state or one of its instrumentalities does not offend 15 U.S.C. § 1692e, which bars "false, deceptive, or misleading representation[s]... in connection with the collection of any debt."