Corpus browser
179663 records-
Open
Becerra v. Empire Health Foundation, For Valley Hospital Medical Center
Becerra v. Empire Health Foundation, For Valley Hospital Medical Center
For purposes of calculating the Medicare fraction—one of two fractions the Medicare program uses to adjust the rates paid to hospitals that serve a higher-than-usual percentage of low-income patients—those individuals “entitled to [Medicare Part A] benefits” are all those qualif…
-
Open
Becerra v. San Carlos Apache Tribe
Becerra v. San Carlos Apache Tribe
The Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act requires the Indian Health Service to pay the contract support costs that a tribe incurs when it collects and spends program income—i.e., revenue from third-party payers like Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurers—to f…
-
Open
Before An Employee Starts
English (Rev. 1/2011)
-
Open
Before An Employee Starts Spanish
Spanish (Rev. 1/2011)
-
Open
Benefits
English (Rev. 9/2015)
-
Open
Benefits Spanish
Spanish (Rev. 9.2015)
-
Open
Berger v. North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP
Berger v. North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP
The speaker of the North Carolina State House of Representatives and the president pro tempore of the North Carolina State Senate are entitled to intervene in this litigation challenging North Carolina’s voter-ID law.
-
Open
Berk v. Choy
Berk v. Choy
Delaware law requiring a plaintiff suing for medical malpractice to provide an affidavit from a medical professional attesting to the suit’s merit, Del. Code, Tit. 18, §6853(a)(1), conflicts with a valid Federal Rule of Civil Procedure and does not apply in federal court.
-
Open
Biden v. Missouri
Biden v. Missouri
The Court grants the applications to stay the two injunctions barring the Secretary of Health and Human Services’ regulation requiring facilities that participate in Medicare and Medicaid to ensure that their employees are vaccinated against COVID–19.
-
Open
Biden v. Nebraska
Biden v. Nebraska
The Secretary of Education does not have authority under the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act of 2003 (HEROES Act) to establish a student loan forgiveness program that will cancel roughly $430 billion in debt principal and affect nearly all borrowers.
-
Open
Biden v. Texas
Biden v. Texas
The Government’s rescission of Migrant Protection Protocols did not violate section 1225 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, and the then-Secretary of Homeland Security’s October 29 Memoranda constituted valid final agency action.
-
Open
Biestek v. Berryhill
Biestek v. Berryhill
A vocational expert’s refusal to provide private market-survey data during a Social Security disability benefits hearing upon the applicant’s request does not categorically preclude the testimony from counting as “substantial evidence” in federal court under 42 U. S. C. §405(g).
-
Open
Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries Park St., LLC
Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries Park St., LLC
A transportation worker need not work in the transportation industry to be exempt from coverage under §1 of the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U. S. C. §1 et seq.
-
Open
Bittner v. United States
Bittner v. United States
The Bank Secrecy Act’s $10,000 maximum penalty for the nonwillful failure to file a compliant report accrues on a per-report, not a per-account, basis.
-
Open
Boechler v. Commissioner
Boechler v. Commissioner
The 30-day time limit to file a petition for review of a collection due process determination, 26 U. S. C. §6330(d)(1), is a nonjurisdictional deadline subject to equitable tolling.
-
Open
Bondi v. Vanderstok
Bondi v. Vanderstok
ATF's 2022 Rule interpreting the Gun Control Act of 1968 to cover certain products that can readily be converted into an operational firearm or a functional frame or receiver, see 27 CFR §§478.11, 478.12(c), is not facially inconsistent with the Act.
-
Open
Borden v. United States
Borden v. United States
The decision of the Sixth Circuit—holding that an offense with a mental state of recklessness may qualify as a “violent felony” under the Armed Career Criminal Act’s elements clause, 18 U. S. C. §924(e)(2)(B)(i)—is reversed, and the case is remanded.
-
Open
Bost v. Illinois Bd. of Elections
Bost v. Illinois Bd. of Elections
As a candidate for office, Congressman Bost has standing to challenge the rules that govern the counting of votes in his election.
-
Open
Bouarfa v. Mayorkas
Bouarfa v. Mayorkas
Revocation of an approved visa petition under 8 U. S. C. §1155 based on a sham-marriage determination by the Secretary of Homeland Security is the kind of discretionary decision that falls within the purview of §1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), which strips federal courts of jurisdiction to r…
-
Open
Bowe v. United States
Bowe v. United States
Title 28 U. S. C. §2244(b)(3)(E) does not bar this Court’s review of a federal prisoner’s request to file a second or successive §2255 motion for postconviction relief, and §2244(b)(1) does not apply to second or successive motions filed under §2255(h) by federal prisoners chall…
-
Open
Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, Inc.
Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, Inc.
Indiana’s law relating to the disposition of fetal remains by abortion providers passes rational basis review; certiorari is denied on the question whether the State may bar the knowing provision of sex-, race-, or disability-selective abortions by abortion providers, as only th…
-
Open
Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee
Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee
Arizona’s challenged voting regulations governing precinct-based election-day voting (rejecting ballots cast in the wrong precinct) and early mail-in voting (making it a crime for anyone other than an authorized proxy to possess the early ballot of another voter) do not violate …
-
Open
Brown v. Davenport
Brown v. Davenport
When a state court has ruled on the merits of a state prisoner’s claim, a federal court cannot grant habeas relief without applying both the test this Court outlined in Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U. S. 619, and the one Congress prescribed in the Antiterrorism and Effective Death …
-
Open
Brown v. United States
Brown v. United States
For purposes of the Armed Career Criminal Act’s 15-year mandatory minimum sentence on certain defendants with three or more previous convictions, a state drug conviction counts as an ACCA predicate if it involved a drug on the federal schedules at the time of that offense.
-
Open
Brownback v. King
Brownback v. King
The District Court’s order dismissing King’s Federal Tort Claims Act claims was a judgment on the merits that can trigger the Act’s judgment bar to block his Bivens claims. See 28 U. S. C. §2676; Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U. S. 388.