This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 586 of the United States Reports :
| Case name | Docket no. | Date decided |
|---|---|---|
| Mount Lemmon Fire District v. Guido | 17–587 | November 6,2018 |
| Under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, state and local governments are covered employers regardless of the number of employees they have. | ||
| Weyerhaeuser Company v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service | 17–71 | November 27,2018 |
| An area is eligible for designation as "critical habitat" under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 only if it is habitat for the listed species; and the decision by the secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior not to exclude an area from critical habitat under 16 U. S. C. §1533(b)(2) is subject to judicial review. | ||
| United States v. Stitt | 17–765 | December 10,2018 |
| The term "burglary" in the Armed Career Criminal Act includes burglary of a structure or vehicle that has been adapted or is customarily used for overnight accommodation. | ||
| Escondido v. Emmons | 17–1660 | January 7,2019 |
| Shoop v. Hill | 18–56 | January 7,2019 |
| Culbertson v. Berryhill | 17–773 | January 8,2019 |
| The Social Security Act's 25% cap on awards of attorney's fees applies only to fees for court representation, not to the aggregate fees awarded for representation before the agency and before the court. | ||
| Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White Sales, Inc. | 17–1272 | January 8,2019 |
| The Fifth Circuit's "wholly groundless" exception to a valid delegation of arbitrability is inconsistent with the Federal Arbitration Act. Where parties have clearly delegated decisions on arbitrability to an arbitrator, courts must defer to the arbitrator on those questions. | ||
| Stokeling v. United States | 17–5554 | January 15,2019 |
| A state robbery offense that includes as an element the common law requirement of overcoming "victim resistance" is categorically a "violent felony" under the definition of the term under the Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984, even when only 'slight force' is required to meet the elements of the crime. | ||
| New Prime Inc. v. Oliveira | 17–340 | January 15,2019 |
| Helsinn Healthcare S. A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. | 17–1229 | January 22,2019 |
| A commercial sale of a patent to a third party who is required to keep the invention confidential may place the invention "on sale" under Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, meaning the invention qualifies as prior art that invalidates subsequent patents. | ||
| Moore v. Texas | 18–443 | February 19,2019 |
| Timbs v. Indiana | 17–1091 | February 20,2019 |
| The Eighth Amendment's Excessive Fines Clause is an incorporated protection applicable to the States pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. | ||
| Dawson v. Steager | 17–419 | February 20,2019 |
| A state violates the intergovernmental tax immunity doctrine when it treats retired state employees more favorably than retired federal employees and no significant differences between the two classes justify the differential treatment. | ||
| Yovino v. Rizo | 18–272 | February 25,2019 |
| Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert | 17–1094 | February 26,2019 |
| Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f), which provides 14 days for seeking permission to appeal a class certification order, is "a nonjurisdictional claim-processing rule" that is not subject to equitable tolling. | ||
| Jam v. International Finance Corp. | 17–1011 | February 27,2019 |
| The International Organizations Immunities Act grants international organizations the same immunity from suit that foreign governments have under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. | ||
| Garza v. Idaho | 17–1026 | February 27,2019 |
| The presumption of prejudice as recognized in Roe v. Flores-Ortega applies regardless of whether a defendant has waived the right to appeal. | ||
| Madison v. Alabama | 17–7505 | February 27,2019 |
| The Eighth Amendment may permit executing a prisoner even if he or she cannot remember committing his or her crime, but it may prohibit executing a prisoner who suffers from dementia or another disorder, rather than psychotic delusions. | ||
| Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.com | 17–571 | March 4,2019 |
| A registration certificate must be provided before a copyright infringement lawsuit can be filed. | ||
| BNSF Railway Co. v. Loos | 17–1042 | March 4,2019 |
| A railroad's payment to an employee for working time lost due to an on-the-job injury is taxable "compensation" under the Railroad Retirement Tax Act. | ||
| Rimini Street, Inc. v. Oracle USA, Inc. | 17–1625 | March 4,2019 |
| A federal district court's discretion to award "full costs" to a party in copyright litigation pursuant to 17 U. S. C. §505 is limited to the six categories specified in the general costs statute codified at 28 U. S. C. §§1821 and 1920. | ||
| Washington State Dept. of Licensing v. Cougar Den, Inc. | 16–1498 | March 19,2019 |
| The Yakama Nation Treaty of 1855 preempts the state law which the State purported to be able to tax fuel purchased by a tribal corporation for sale to tribal members. | ||
| Nielsen v. Preap | 16–1363 | March 19,2019 |
| The government has the power to detain, at any time, undocumented immigrants that have committed certain crimes that could lead to their deportation, even if they were not detained by immigration authorities upon release from criminal custody. | ||
| Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. DeVries | 17–1104 | March 19,2019 |
| In the maritime tort context, a product manufacturer has a duty to warn when its product requires incorporation of a part, the manufacturer knows or has reason to know that the integrated product is likely to be dangerous for its intended uses, and the manufacturer has no reason to believe that the product's users will realize that danger. | ||
| Obduskey v. McCarthy & Holthus LLP | 17–1307 | March 20,2019 |
| A business engaged in only nonjudicial foreclosure proceedings is not a "debt collector" under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, except for the limited purpose of Section 1692f(6). | ||
| Frank v. Gaos | 17–961 | March 20,2019 |
| The case is remanded for the courts below to address the plaintiffs' standing in light of Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins | ||