No. 76-1524. TIMES MIRROR CO. v. ANSELMI ET AL. C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied. MR. JUSTICE STEWART and MR. JUSTICE POWELL would grant certiorari. Reported below: 552 F.2d 316.
No. 76-1533. FOGG, CORRECTIONAL SUPERINTENDENT V. WELCOME. C. A. 2d Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Petition for writ of certiorari denied as untimely filed. 28 U. S. C. § 2101 (c). Reported below: 549 F.2d 853.
No. 76-6333. GHOLSON ET AL. v. TEXAS. Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 542 S. W. 2d 395. MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN and MR. JUSTICE MARSHALL, dissenting.
Adhering to our views that the death penalty is in all circumstances cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U. S. 153, 227, 231 (1976), we would vacate the death sentences in this case.
No. 76-1353. KUYKENDALL v. SOUTHERN FARM BUREAU CASUALTY INSURANCE CO., 431 U. S. 917;
No. 76-6265. GOODWIN v. GEORGIA, 431 U. S. 909; and No. 76-6397. BOYD V. RODRIGUEZ, WARDEN, 431 U. S. 921. Petitions for rehearing denied.
No. 665, O. T. 1966. KLEIN v. KLEIN, 385 U. S. 973. Motion for leave to file third petition for rehearing denied.
No. 76-330. PARKER V. BOORSTIN, LIBRARIAN OF CONGRESS, ET AL., 429 U. S. 978. Motion for leave to file petition for rehearing denied.
ABORTIONS. See also Constitutional Law, III, 3, 5; VI; Social Se-
curity Act, 3.
State funding-Medical necessity. Since it is not unreasonable for a
State to insist upon a prior showing of medical necessity to insure that its
money is being spent only for authorized purposes, District Court erred
in invalidating Connecticut requirements of prior written request by preg-
nant woman and prior authorization by Connecticut Department of Social
Services for abortions. Although similar requirements are not imposed for
other medical procedures, such procedures do not involve termination of
a potential human life. Maher v. Roe, p. 464.
ACCESS TO BALLOT. See Constitutional Law, III, 4.
ACCOMMODATION TO EMPLOYEES' RELIGIOUS NEEDS. See
Civil Rights Act of 1964, 1.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE. See Investment Company Act of
1940.
ADMISSIBILITY OF IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE. See Constitu-
tional Law, II, 1.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO MURDER. See Constitutional Law,
II, 2, 4.
AID TO EDUCATION. See Constitutional Law, III, 1.
AID TO FAMILIES WITH DEPENDENT CHILDREN. See Social
Security Act, 1.
AID TO FAMILIES WITH DEPENDENT
PLOYED FATHERS. See Social Security Act, 2.
AIRLINE STEWARDESSES. See Intervention.
ALIENS. See Constitutional Law, III, 1.
AMOUNT IN CONTROVERSY. See Jurisdiction, 1.
See Constitutional Law, I; Jurisdiction, 1;
ASSOCIATIONAL STANDING. See Standing to Sue.
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OBJECTION TO REAPPORTIONMENT
PLAN. See Voting Rights Act of 1965, 2.
AUTOMOBILE THEFT. See Constitutional Law, V, 1.
Preliminary injunction against mortgage foreclosure.-Title 12 U. S. C.
§ 91, which prohibits an "attachment, injunction, or execution" from being
issued against a national bank or its property before final judgment in
any state or local court, when read in context, merely prevents prejudg-
ment seizure of bank property by creditors and does not apply to a
mortgagor-debtor's action seeking a preliminary injunction to protect its
real property from wrongful foreclosure. Third National Bank v. Impac
Limited, Inc., p. 312.
"BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD" AS JUSTIFYING NONDIS-
CLOSURE OF ILLEGITIMATE CHILD'S FATHER. See Social
Security Act, 1.
BURDEN OF PROVING AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO MURDER.
See Constitutional Law, II, 2, 4.
BURDEN ON INDEPENDENT CANDIDATES' ACCESS TO BALLOT.
See Constitutional Law, III, 4.
BURDENS ON INTERSTATE COMMERCE. See Constitutional Law,
I.
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. See Constitutional Law, II, 3; III, 2; IV.
CERTIORARI.
Improvident grant-Failure to present question.-Where petitioner's
counsel informed this Court at oral argument that petitioner's sole claim
of constitutional deprivation resulting from her minor son's being shot and
killed by respondent police officer was one based on her personal liberty
and not one of pecuniary loss such as would be covered by Colorado's
wrongful-death statute, but that contention was neither alleged in her
complaint (which included claims based on wrongful-death statute and a
claim under 42 U. S. C. § 1983), presented in her petition for certiorari,
nor fairly subsumed in question that was presented as to whether wrong-
ful-death statute's limitation on damages controlled in a § 1983 action, writ
of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted. Jones v. Hildebrant,
p. 183.
CHANGES IN DEATH PENALTY STATUTE. See Constitutional
Law, III, 2; IV.
CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964. See also Intervention.
1. Accommodation to employee's religious needs-Employer's reasonable
efforts. Petitioner airline, which made reasonable efforts within frame-
work of its seniority system to accommodate religious needs of respondent
employee, whose religious beliefs prohibit him from working on Satur-
CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964-Continued.
days, did not violate Title VII of Act, and each of Court of Appeals'
suggested alternatives would have been an undue hardship within meaning
of statute as construed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
guidelines. Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison, p. 63.
2. Courts' discretionary remedial power-Equal Employment Opportu-
nity Commission's delay in bringing suit.-Courts do not lack discretionary
remedial power if, despite procedural protections accorded a Title VII
defendant under Act, EEOC's delay in bringing suit, after conciliation
efforts have failed, significantly handicaps defense. Occidental Life In-
surance Co. v. EEOC, p. 355.
3. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission enforcement actions—
Subjection to state statutes of limitations.-EEOC enforcement actions
are not subject to state statutes of limitations. Though a congressional
intent to apply a local limitations period has been inferred in instances
where a federal statute creating a cause of action fails to specify such a
period, state limitations periods will not be borrowed if their application
would not comport with federal statute's underlying policies. Occidental
Life Insurance Co. v. EEOC, p. 355.
4. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's power to file suit-
Effect of 8706 (f) (1).—Section 706 (f) (1) of Act imposes no limitation
upon EEOC's power to file suit in federal court. Provision's language
and legislative history show that it was intended to enable an aggrieved
person unwilling to await conclusion of extended EEOC proceedings to
institute a private lawsuit 180 days after a charge has been filed.
Occidental Life Insurance Co. v. EEOC, p. 355.
5. Seniority system-Unlawful employment practice.-Under § 703 (h)
of Title VII of Act, absent a discriminatory purpose, operation of a
seniority system cannot be an unlawful employment practice even if sys-
tem is discriminatory in its effect. Trans World Airlines, Inc. v.
Hardison, p. 63.
CLASS ACTIONS. See Intervention.
CLOSED-END INVESTMENT COMPANIES. See Investment Com-
pany Act of 1940.
COLLEGES. See Constitutional Law, III, 1.
COMMERCE CLAUSE. See Constitutional Law, I.
CONNECTICUT. See Abortions; Constitutional Law, III, 5; VI; 80-
cial Security Act, 1.
CONSPIRACY TO DISTRIBUTE DRUGS. See Constitutional Law,
V, 2; Criminal Law.
|