Oct | Nov | Dec | Jan| Feb | Mar| Apr| Unscheduled
December 2001
Monday, December 3
Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services v. Irene Blumer
No. 00-952
Subject:
Medicaid, Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1998, Community Spouse Resource Allowance, Minimum Monthly Maintenance Needs Allowance
Question:
Whether, in a "fair hearing" proceeding to consider whether
to raise the community spouse's resource allowance pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
1396r-5(e), Wisconsin's "income first" requirement, Wis. Stat.
Ann. § 49.455(8)(d) (West 1997), which treats income otherwise attributable
to the institutionalized spouse as available to the community spouse to
meet that spouse's minimum monthly maintenance needs, is consistent with
the federal statute, 42 U.S.C. 1396r-5(e)(2)(C).
Decisions:
Resources:
Briefs:
Parties:
- Respondent [PDF]
- Petitioner - Reply [PDF]
Amicus - Petitioner:
- United States [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
Amicus - Respondent:
- United States (Petition) [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
Caren Cronk Thomas and Windy City Hemp Development Board v. Chicago Park District
No. 00-1249
Subject:
First Amendment, Prior Restrait, Permit Procedures
Question:
A Chicago Park District ordinance requires a person to obtain a permit
before conducting "events involving more than fifty individuals"
in a municipal park. The ordinance specifies the grounds on which a permit
application may be denied, none of which is based on the content of any
expression that may be involved in the event. The questions presented are:
1. Whether the ordinance vests the permit-granting authority with too
much discretion to satisfy First Amendment standards.
2. Whether, in order to satisfy the First Amendment, the ordinance must
ensure that final judicial decision on the merits of an applicant's challenge
to the denial of a permit will be rendered within a fixed deadline.
3. Whether, in order to satisfy the First Amendment, the ordinance must
require the Park District to initiate a judicial proceeding to give effect
to the administrative denial of a permit application, or whether instead
it is sufficient that the applicant seek judicial review of the administrative
permit denial.
Decisions:
Resources:
Briefs:
Amicus - Respondent:
- United States [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
Tuesday, December 4
City of Los Angeles v. Alameda Books, Inc., et al.
No. 00-799
Subject:
First Amendment, Free Speech, Zoning, Adult Bookstores, Adult Video Arcades
Question:
Decisions:
Resources:
Briefs:
Amicus - Petitioner:
- Morality in Media [PDF] [MS-Word]
US Airways, Inc. v. Robert Barnett
No. 00-1250
Subject:
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Reasonable Accommodations, Interactive Process
Question:
Whether, as the Ninth Circuit held below, the ADA requires an employer to reassign a disabled employee to a vacant position as a reasonable accommodation where necessary to retain the employee, or whether, as the Petitioner asserts, an employer that has adopted a seniority policy is exempt from this requirement.
Decisions:
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit, Filed: October 6, 1998
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit, Amended: October 28, 1999
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit, Order: February 1, 2000
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit, Filed: October 4, 2000
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: April 16, 2001
- United States Supreme Court, Decided: April 29, 2002
Resources:
Briefs:
Wednesday, December 5
Richard L. Mathias, et al. v. WorldCom Tech., Inc., et al.
No. 00-878
Subject:
Eleventh Amendment, State Immunity, Federal Review, State Utility Commission
Question:
-
Whether a state commission's action relating to the
enforcement of a previously approved section 252
interconnection agreement is a "determination under
[section 252]" and thus is reviewable in federal court
under 47 U.S.C. §252(e)(6).
- Whether a state commission's acceptance of Congress'
invitation to participate in implementing a federal
regulatory scheme that provides that state commission
determinations are reviewable in federal court constitutes
a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity.
- Whether an official capacity action seeking prospective
relief against state public utility commissioners for
alleged ongoing violations of federal law in performing
federal regulatory functions under the federal
Telecommuncations Act of 1996 can be maintained under the
Ex parte Young doctrine.
Decisions:
Resources:
Briefs:
Parties:
- Respondent United States [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
Verizon Maryland Inc. v. Public Service Commission of Maryland
United States v. Public Service Commission of Maryland
Nos. 00-1531, 00-1711
Subject:
Telecommunications Act of 1996, Interconnection Agreements, Jurisdiction
Question:
Whether a federal district court has subject-matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331 to determine whether a state
commission's action interpreting or enforcing an interconnection agreement violates the 1996 Act.
Decisions:
Resources:
Briefs:
Parties:
- Petitioner United States (Petition) [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]
- Petitioner United States [PDF] [TEXT] [RTF]