Holding: Congress’ enactment of a significant fee increase that exempted debtors in two states violated the uniformity requirement of the bankruptcy clause.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Sotomayor on June 6, 2022.
You May Also Like
Kennedy v. Bremerton School District
legaladmin
Holding: The free exercise and free speech clauses of the First Amendment protect an individual engaging in a personal religious observance from government reprisal; the Constitution neither mandates nor permits…
Nance v. Ward
Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is the procedural vehicle appropriate for a prisoner’s method-of-execution claim
George v. McDonough
Holding: The invalidation of a Department of Veterans Affairs regulation after a veteran’s benefits decision becomes final cannot support a claim for collateral relief permitting revision of that decision based…
Kemp v. United States
Holding: The term “mistake” in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(1) includes a judge’s errors of law; because Dexter Kemp’s motion alleged such an error, it was cognizable under Rule 60(b)(1) and…
United States v. Washington
Holding: Washington’s workers’ compensation law is unconstitutional under the supremacy clause because it facially discriminates against the federal government and does not fall within the scope of the federal waiver…
Vega v. Tekoh
Holding: A violation of the prophylactic rules described in Miranda v. Arizona does not provide a basis for a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 6-3, in an opinion by…