|Case||Summary||Where did the case come from?||Government position||My position||My prediction for outcome|
|9/9/2009||Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission||Whether to overrule precedents upholding state and federal limits on corporate political spending.||D.C. Circuit||No||No||Yes|
|10/6/2009||U.S. v. Stevens||Can the government criminalize selling dogfight videotapes or other depictions of animal cruelty?||3rd Circuit||Yes||No||No|
|10/7/2009||Salazar v. Buono||Can an individual challenge a cross on property the government transferred to a private organization?||9th Circuit||No||No||No|
|11/2/2009||Jones v. Harris Associates||Can an investor challenge a mutual-fund adviser for charging excessive fees?||7th Circuit||Yes||Yes||No|
|11/3/2009||Hemi Group LLC v. City of New York||Can a city use civil RICO lawsuit to collect cigarette taxes?||2nd Circuit||N/A||No||No|
|11/4/2009||Pottawattamie County, IA v. McGhee||May a prosecutor be sued for allegedly using false testimony to win a conviction?||8th Circuit||No||Yes||Yes|
|11/9/2009||Graham v. Florida||Can a juvenile offender be sentenced to life without parole for a non-homicide crime?||Florida Supreme Court||N/A||No||No|
|11/9/2009||Bilski v. Kappos||Must a business method patent be tied to a particular machine or apparatus,” or transform something "into a different state or thing," to be valid?||Federal Circuit||Yes||Yes||Yes|
|12/2/2009||Stop the Beach Renourishment Inc. v. Florida||Does a state program to replenish eroded beaches for public use unconstitutionally deprive coastal property owners of their private ocean access?||Florida Supreme Court||N/A||No||No|
|Not yet scheduled||U.S. v. Comstock||Do federal prisons have the authority to hold "sexually dangerous" inmates past their sentences out of fear they will violate state law?||4th Circuit||Yes||No||No|
|Not yet scheduled||American Needle Inc. v. NFL||Extent of NFL monopoly over individual team logos||7th Circuit||Not yet filed
||Teams, not NFL, control team logos||Teams, not NFL, control team logos|
|Not yet scheduled||Florida v. Powell||Does merely telling the accused that he can "talk to attorney" meet the Miranda rights requirement?||Florida Supreme Court||N/A||No||No|
NEXT DAY UPDATE: Add one more — a biggie — to the list:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Supreme Court will decide whether the constitutional right of individuals to own firearms trumps state and local laws, reviving the legal battle over gun rights in America.
The high court said Wednesday it agreed to decide the reach of its landmark ruling last year that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guaranteed an individual right to own guns and use them for lawful purposes like self-defense in the home.
Gun rights cases have been among the country's most divisive social, political and legal issues. The Supreme Court split, in a 5-4 vote, between the conservative and liberal factions, in the 2008 ruling.
The court last year prohibited the federal government from imposing certain restrictions, but it left unclear whether the right also applied to state and local gun control laws.
The Supreme Court said in a brief order it would settle that question by ruling in a dispute over a strict gun control law in Chicago.