OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# United States Code/Title 18/Appendix

From from the U.S. House of Representatives. See Cornell's LII for additional info.
Title 18—Crimes and Criminal Procedure Appendix
* Seq. 1 — Unlawful Possession or Receipt of Firearms (Repealed)
* Seq. 2 — Interstate Agreement on Detainers
* Seq. 3 — Classified Information Procedures Act
* Seq. 4 — Federal Rules of Evidence (see Notes)
* Seq. 5 — Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

## Notes

    The text of the Federal Rules of Evidence enacted into law by Pub. L. 93–595, § 1, Jan. 2, 1975, 88 Stat. 1929, is set out in the Appendix to Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.
    Rule 1101(b) of the Rules of Evidence provides that the rules apply generally to civil actions and proceedings, including admiralty and maritime cases, to criminal cases and proceedings, to contempt proceedings except those in which the court may act summarily, and to proceedings and cases under Title 11, Bankruptcy.
# UN General Assembly Resolution 237

* related portals: United Nations, United Nations General Assembly Resolutions.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Adopted on May 11, 1949 37-12-9
[273 (III). Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations]
Having received the report of the Security Council on the application of Israel for membership in the United Nations,
Noting that, in the judgment of the Security Council, Israel is a peace-loving State and is able and willing to carry out the obligations contained in the Charter,
Noting that the Security Council has recommended to the general Assembly that it admit Israel to membership in the United Nations,
Noting furthermore the declaration by the State of Israel that it "unreservedly accepts the obligations of the United Nations Charter and undertakes to honour them from the day when it becomes a member of the United Nations",
Recalling its resolutions of 29 November 1947 and 11 December 1948 and taking note of the declarations and explanations made by the representative of the Government of Israel before the Ad Hoc Political Committee in respect of the implementation of the said resolutions,
The General Assembly,
Acting in discharge of its functions under Article 4 of the Charter and rule 125 of its rules of procedure,
1. Decides that Israel is a peace loving State which accepts the obligations contained in the Charter and is able and willing to carry out those obligations;
2. Decides to admit Israel to membership in the United Nations.
___________________
* ↑ See document A/818.
* ↑ See document S/1093.
* ↑ See Resolutions adopted by the General Assembly during its second session, pages 131-132.
* ↑ See Resolutions adopted by the General Assembly during Part I of its third session, pages 21-25.
* ↑ See documents A/AC.24/SR.45-48, 50 and 51.
# Two Brothers

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Two Brothers."
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
This is a disambiguation page. It lists works that share the same title. If an article link referred you here, please consider editing it to point directly to the intended page.
* The Two Brothers, a novel by Honoré de Balzac
* Two Brothers, a poem by Florence Earle Coates
* The Two Brothers, a tale by Jacob Grimm and Wilhelm Grimm
* "The Twa Brothers", English folk song (Child #49)
# Two Brothers Plead Guilty in Conspiracy to Hold Thai Workers in Forced Labor in Hawaii

Two Brothers Plead Guilty in Conspiracy to Hold Thai Workers in Forced Labor in Hawaii. United States Department of Justice. www.justice.gov. (January 14, 2010).
Justice News
Department of Justice
Office of Public Affairs
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Two Brothers Plead Guilty in Conspiracy to Hold Thai Workers in Forced Labor in Hawaii
Justice News
United States Department of Justice Two Brothers Plead Guilty in Conspiracy to Hold Thai Workers in Forced Labor in Hawaii
January 14, 2010
WASHINGTON – Defendants Alec Sou and Mike Sou, co-owners of Aloun Farm, pleaded guilty on Jan.13, 2010, in federal district court in Honolulu, to conspiring to commit forced labor. The two defendants, who are brothers, each face up to five years in prison for their respective roles in a labor trafficking scheme that held Thai agricultural workers in service at Aloun Farm through a scheme of debts, threats and restraint.
During their respective plea hearings, the defendants acknowledged that they conspired with one another and with others to hold 44 Thai men in forced labor on a farm operated by the defendants, using a scheme of physical restraint and threats of serious harm to intimidate the workers and hold them in fear of attempting to leave the defendants’ service.
"Holding other human beings in servitude against their will is a violation of individual rights that is intolerable in a free society," stated Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. "This prosecution demonstrates our commitment to combating human trafficking in all its forms, vindicating the rights of trafficking victims, and bringing human traffickers to justice."
"Labor traffickers prey on vulnerable victims and their dreams of a better life. Those who conspire to hold workers in forced labor undermine this country's promise of liberty and opportunity," said Florence T. Nakakuni, U.S. Attorney for the District of Hawaii. "We will continue to hold accountable those who seek to enrich themselves at the expense of the freedom, rights and dignity of others."
In the past fiscal year, the Civil Rights Division, in partnership with U.S. Attorney’s Offices, brought a record number of human trafficking cases, including the highest number of labor trafficking cases ever brought in a single year.
The government’s case is being prosecuted by trial attorneys Susan French and Kevonne Small of the Criminal Section of the Civil Rights Division and its Human Trafficking Prosecution Unit and by Assistant U.S. Attorney Susan Cushman.
This case was investigated by FBI Special Agents Gary Brown in Honolulu and Tricia Whitehill in Los Angeles, with support from ICE Special Agents Frank Kalepa and Daniel Kenney.
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Two Fares East

* information about this edition.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
   “West—Hashknife and Sleepy, tourists.”
Here's
a new complete Novel
Two
Fares
East
ByW. C. Tuttle
* 1. Wedding night 2
* 2. “Hanging is too good—” 10
* 3. The new sheriff 17
* 4. Range funeral 25
* 5. Hashknife and Sleepy 27
* 6. Hashknife smells a rat 35
* 7. City vs. Range 41
* 8. Clues 51
* 9. The Inquest 62
Copyright, 1926, by The Butterick Publishing Company in the United States and Great Britain. All rights reserved.
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
The longest-living author of this work died in 1969, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 54 years or less. This work may be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Two Brothers (Coates)

"My brother's face is turned from me"
* Coates, Florence Earle (1909), "Two Brothers" in Lyrics of Life.
* Coates, Florence Earle (1916), "Two Brothers" in Poems II.
# Tixall Poetry/A Pastoral Protest of Love, by Damon to Stella

A Pastoral Protest of Love,
by
Damon to Stella.
# Tixall Poetry/A Present of Bands and Cuffes

A Present of
Bands and Cuffes,
# Tixall Poetry/A Scotch Ballad

XLVI.
A Scotch Ballad.
# Tixall Poetry/A Sigh to St Monica's Teares

A Sigh to St Monica's Teares.
# Tixall Poetry/A New Remonstrance to His Malignant Mistresse

A New Remonstrance
to
His Malignant Mistresse.
# Tixall Poetry/A Song for Love

A Song for Love.
# Tixall Poetry/A Song for Drinking

A Song for Drinking.
Would you be a man of fashion? Would you lead a life divine? Take a little dram of passion, In a lusty dose of wine.
If the nymph have no compassion, Vain it is to sigh and grone, Love was but put in for fashion, Wine will doe the worke alone.
# Tixall Poetry/A Song ("Ah! fading joy!")

A Song.
# Tixall Poetry/A Song ("All the flatteries of fate…")

III.
A Song
# Tixall Poetry/A Song ("Now that the spring…")

XIX.
A Song.
# Turner v. California

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
498 U.S. 1053
Turner v. California
No. 90-6047
The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
Justice MARSHALL, dissenting.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Turner v. Board of Commisioners of Wilkes County

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
173 U.S. 461
Turner v. Board of Commisioners of Wilkes County
Richard N. Hackett, for plaintiffs in error.
A. C. Avery, for defendants in error.
Mr. Justice PECKHAM delivered the opinion of the court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Turner v. Arkansas/Concurrence Blackmun

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Per Curiam Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinion Blackmun
[p366] MR. JUSTICE BLACKMUN, with whom. MR. JUSTICE REHNQUIST joins, concurring.
Given the decision in Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436 (1970) (see, however, my dissent in Harris v. Washington, 404 U.S. 55, 57 (1971)), I join the judgment of the Court.
# Turner v. Farmers' Loan Trust Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
106 U.S. 552
Turner v. Farmers' Loan Trust Company
N. A. Cowdry and Geo. W. Kretzinger, for appellants.
Jas. D. Campbell, for appellees.
HARLAN, J.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Turner v. City of Memphis

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
369 U.S. 350
Turner v. City of Memphis
Argued: Feb. 27, 1962. --- Decided: March 26, 1962
Mrs. Constance Baker Motley, New York City, for appellant.
Frank B. Gianotti, Jr., Memphis, Tenn., for appellee, City of memphis.
John M. Heiskell, Memphis, Tenn., for appellees, Dobbs Houses, Inc., and W. S. Haverfield.
PER CURIAM.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# United States Code/Title 42/Chapter 85/Section 7415

§ 7415. International air pollution CAA § 115

## (a) Endangerment of public health or welfare in foreign countries from pollution emitted in United States

Whenever the Administrator, upon receipt of reports, surveys or studies from any duly constituted international agency has reason to believe that any air pollutant or pollutants emitted in the United States cause or contribute to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare in a foreign country or whenever the Secretary of State requests him to do so with respect to such pollution which the Secretary of State alleges is of such a nature, the Administrator shall give formal notification thereof to the Governor of the State in which such emissions originate.

## (b) Prevention or elimination of endangerment

The notice of the Administrator shall be deemed to be a finding under section 7410 (a)(2)(H)(ii) of this title which requires a plan revision with respect to so much of the applicable implementation plan as is inadequate to prevent or eliminate the endangerment referred to in subsection (a) of this section. Any foreign country so affected by such emission of pollutant or pollutants shall be invited to appear at any public hearing associated with any revision of the appropriate portion of the applicable implementation plan.

## (c) Reciprocity

This section shall apply only to a foreign country which the Administrator determines has given the United States essentially the same rights with respect to the prevention or control of air pollution occurring in that country as is given that country by this section.

## (d) Recommendations

Recommendations issued following any abatement conference conducted prior to August 7, 1977, shall remain in effect with respect to any pollutant for which no national ambient air quality standard has been established under section 7409 of this title unless the Administrator, after consultation with all agencies which were party to the conference, rescinds any such recommendation on grounds of obsolescence.
# United States Code/Title 42/Chapter 85/Section 7416

§ 7416. Retention of State authority CAA § 116
Except as otherwise provided in sections 1857c–10 (c), (e), and (f) (as in effect before August 7, 1977), 7543, 7545(c)(4), and 7573 of this title (preempting certain State regulation of moving sources) nothing in this chapter shall preclude or deny the right of any State or political subdivision thereof to adopt or enforce (1) any standard or limitation respecting emissions of air pollutants or (2) any requirement respecting control or abatement of air pollution; except that if an emission standard or limitation is in effect under an applicable implementation plan or under section 7411 or section 7412 of this title, such State or political subdivision may not adopt or enforce any emission standard or limitation which is less stringent than the standard or limitation under such plan or section.
# Tixall Poetry/The Jealous Lover

LXXII.
The Jealous Lover.
# Tixall Poetry/The Perfect Lover

The Perfect Lover.
# Tixall Poetry/The Poore New Ye Are's Gift of Wishes Cobled Together

The Poore New Ye Are's Gift of Wishes Cobled Together.
# Tixall Poetry/The Power of Love

V.
The Power of Love.
# Tixall Poetry/The Pleasures of Madness

XXXIX.
The Pleasures of Madness.
# Tixall Poetry/The Lost Mistress

XXIV.
The Lost Mistress.
# Tixall Poetry/The Golden Mean

The Golden Mean.
# Tixall Poetry/The Immortality of Poesie. To Envy

The Immortality of Poesie.
To Envy.
Ovid. Amor. Lib. I. Eleg. 15.
# Tixall Poetry/The Irresistible Beauty

LVIII.
The Irresistible Beauty.
# Tixall Poetry/The Power of Beauty

LXXI.
The Power of Beauty.
# Ullmann v. United States/Concurrence Reed

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinion Reed
* Dissenting Opinion Douglas
* Wikipedia article
United States Supreme Court
350 U.S. 422
Ullmann v. United States
Argued: Dec. 6, 1955. --- Decided: March 26, 1956
Mr. Justice REED concurs in the opinion and judgment of the Court except as to the statement that no constitutional guarantee enjoys preference. Murdock v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105, 115, 63 S.Ct. 870, 876, 87 L.Ed. 1292; Thomas v. Collins, 323 U.S. 516, 530, 65 S.Ct. 315, 322, 323, 89 L.Ed. 430; cf., Kovacs v. Cooper, 336 U.S. 77, 88, 69 S.Ct. 448, 454, 93 L.Ed. 513.
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, with whom Mr. Justice BLACK concurs, dissenting.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Ullmann v. United States
## Concurring Opinion

    Reed

## Dissenting Opinion

    Douglas
United States Supreme Court
350 U.S. 422
Ullmann v. United States
Argued: Dec. 6, 1955. --- Decided: March 26, 1956
Mr. Leonard B. Boudin, New York City, for petitioner.
Mr. Charles F. Barber, Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Ukrainian romanization table

Ukrainian
| Vernacular | Romanization | Vernacular | Romanization |
| Upper case letters | | Lower case letters | |
| А | A | а | a |
| Б | B | б | b |
| В | V | в | v |
| Г | H | г | h |
| Ґ | G | ґ | g |
| Д | D | д | d |
| Е | E | е | e |
| Є | I͡E | є | i͡e |
| Ж | Z͡H (see Note 1) | ж | z͡h (see Note 1) |
| З | Z | з | z |
| И | Y | и | y |
| І | I | і | i |
| Ї | Ï | ї | ï |
| Й | Ĭ | й | ĭ |
| К | K | к | k |
| Л | L | л | l |
| М | M | м | m |
| Н | N | н | n |
| О | O | о | o |
| П | P | п | p |
| Р | R | р | r |
| С | S | с | s |
| Т | T | т | t |
| У | U | у | u |
| Ф | F | ф | f |
| Х | Kh | х | kh |
| Ц | T͡S (see Note 2) | ц | t͡s (see Note 2) |
| Ч | Ch | ч | ch |
| Ш | Sh | ш | sh |
| Щ | Shch | щ | shch |
| Ь | ʹ (soft sign) | ь | ʹ (soft sign) |
| Ю | I͡U | ю | i͡u |
| Я | I͡A | я | i͡a |
Notes
* The ligature is necessary to distinguish ж from the combination зг.
* The ligature is necessary to distinguish ц from the combination тс.
# Ulla, or the Adjuration

* Ulla, or the Adjuration, in The New Monthly Magazine Volume 14, 1825.
* Ulla, or the Adjuration, in Records of Woman: with Other Poems (Miscellaneous Pieces), 1828.
# United States Reports/Volume 558

* 558 U.S. 1 (2010) Corcoran v. Levenhagen (per curiam)
* 558 U.S. 4 (2010) Bobby v. Van Hook (per curiam)
* 558 U.S. 15 (2010) Wong v. Belmontes (per curiam)
* 558 U.S. 30 (2010) Porter v. McCollum (per curiam)
* 558 U.S. 45 (2010) Michigan v. Fisher (per curiam)
* 558 U.S. 53 (2010) Beard v. Kindler
* 558 U.S. 67 (2010) Union Pacific Railroad Co. v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen General Committee of Adjustment, Central Region
* 558 U.S. 87 (2010) Alvarez v. Smith
* 558 U.S. 100 (2010) Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter
* 558 U.S. 120 (2010) McDaniel v. Brown
* 558 U.S. 139 (2010) Smith v. Spisak
* 558 U.S. 165 (2010) NRG Power Marketing, LLC v. Maine Public Utilities Commission
* 558 U.S. 183 (2010) Hollingsworth v. Perry (per curiam)
* 558 U.S. 209 (2010) Presley v. Georgia (per curiam)
* 558 U.S. 220 (2010) Wellons v. Hall (per curiam)
* 558 U.S. 233 (2010) Kucana v. Holder
* 558 U.S. 256 (2010) South Carolina v. North Carolina
* 558 U.S. 290 (2010) Wood v. Allen
* 558 U.S. 310 (2010) Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
# United States Reports/Volume 563

* 563 U.S. 1 (2011) Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp.
* 563 U.S. 27 (2011) Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracusano
* 563 U.S. 51 (2011) Connick v. Thompson
* 563 U.S. 110 (2011) Astra USA, Inc. v. Santa Clara County
* 563 U.S. 123 (2011) Tolentino v. New York (per curiam)
* 563 U.S. 125 (2011) Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Win
* 563 U.S. 170 (2011) Cullen v. Pinholster
* 563 U.S. 247 (2011) Virginia Office for Protection and Advocacy v. Stewart
* 563 U.S. 277 (2011) Sossamon v. Texas
* 563 U.S. 307 (2011) United States v. Tohono O'odham Nation
* 563 U.S. 333 (2011) AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion
* 563 U.S. 368 (2011) Montana v. Wyoming
* 563 U.S. 395 (2011) Bobby v. Mitts (per curiam)
* 563 U.S. 401 (2011) Schindler Elevator Corp. v. United States ex rel. Kirk
* 563 U.S. 421 (2011) Cigna Corp. v. Amara
* 563 U.S. 452 (2011) Kentucky v. King
* 563 U.S. 478 (2011) General Dynamics Corp. v. United States
* 563 U.S. 493 (2011) Brown v. Plata
* 563 U.S. 582 (2011) Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America v. Whiting
* 563 U.S. 647 (2011) United States v. Tinklenberg
* 563 U.S. 668 (2011) Fowler v. United States
* 563 U.S. 692 (2011) Camreta v. Greene
* 563 U.S. 731 (2011) Ashcroft v. al-Kidd
* 563 U.S. 754 (2011) Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB S.A.
* 563 U.S. 776 (2011) Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc.
* 563 U.S. 804 (2011) Erica P. John Fund, Inc. v. Halliburton Co.
* 563 U.S. 816 (2011) McNeill v. United States
* 563 U.S. 826 (2011) Fox v. Vice
# United States Reports/Volume 556

* 556 U.S. 1 (2009) Bartlett v. Strickland
* 556 U.S. 49 (2009) Vaden v. Discover Bank
* 556 U.S. 81 (2009) Vermont v. Brillon
* 556 U.S. 98 (2009) Kansas v. Colorado
* 556 U.S. 111 (2009) Knowles v. Mirzayance
* 556 U.S. 129 (2009) Puckett v. United States
* 556 U.S. 148 (2009) Rivera v. Illinois
* 556 U.S. 163 (2009) Hawaii v. Office of Hawaiian Affairs
* 556 U.S. 178 (2009) Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Williams
* 556 U.S. 180 (2009) Harbison v. Bell
* 556 U.S. 208 (2009) Entergy Corp. v. Riverkeeper, Inc.
* 556 U.S. 247 (2009) 14 Penn Plaza LLC v. Pyett
* 556 U.S. 287 (2009) United States v. Navajo Nation
* 556 U.S. 303 (2009) Corley v. United States
* 556 U.S. 332 (2009) Arizona v. Gant
* 556 U.S. 366 (2009) Ministry of Defense and Support for the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran v. Elahi
* 556 U.S. 396 (2009) Shinseki v. Sanders
* 556 U.S. 418 (2009) Nken v. Holder
* 556 U.S. 449 (2009) Cone v. Bell
* 556 U.S. 502 (2009) Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television Stations, Inc.
* 556 U.S. 568 (2009) Dean v. United States
* 556 U.S. 586 (2009) Kansas v. Ventris
* 556 U.S. 599 (2009) Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. United States
* 556 U.S. 624 (2009) Arthur Andersen LLP v. Carlisle
* 556 U.S. 635 (2009) Carslbad Technology, Inc. v. HIF BIO, Inc.
* 556 U.S. 646 (2009) Flores-Figueroa v. United States
* 556 U.S. 662 (2009) Ashcroft v. Iqbal
* 556 U.S. 701 (2009) AT&T Corp. v. Hulteen
* 556 U.S. 729 (2009) Haywood v. Drown
* 556 U.S. 778 (2009) Montejo v. Louisiana
* 556 U.S. 816 (2009) Abuelhawa v. United States
* 556 U.S. 825 (2009) Bobby v. Bies
* 556 U.S. 838 (2009) CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Hensley
* 556 U.S. 848 (2009) Republic of Iraq v. Beaty
* 556 U.S. 868 (2009) Caperton v. A. T. Massey Coal Co.
* 556 U.S. 904 (2009) United States v. Denedo
* 556 U.S. 928 (2009) United States ex rel. Eisenstein v. City of New York
* 556 U.S. 938 (2009) Boyle v. United States
* 556 U.S. 960 (2009) Indiana State Police Pension Trust v. Chrysler LLC
* 556 U.S. 1401 (2009) Conkright v. Frommert (Ginsburg, J.)
# United States Reports/Volume 561

* 561 U.S. 1 (2010) Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project
* 561 U.S. 63 (2010) Rent-A-Center, West, Inc. v. Jackson
* 561 U.S. 89 (2010) Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd. v. Regal-Beloit Corp.
* 561 U.S. 139 (2010) Monsanto Co. v. Geertson Seed Farms
* 561 U.S. 186 (2010) Doe v. Reed
* 561 U.S. 247 (2010) Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd.
* 561 U.S. 287 (2010) Granite Rock Co. v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters
* 561 U.S. 320 (2010) Magwood v. Patterson
* 561 U.S. 358 (2010) Skilling v. United States
* 561 U.S. 476 (2010) Weyhrauch v. United States (per curiam)
* 561 U.S. 477 (2010) Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
* 561 U.S. 593 (2010) Bilski v. Kappos
* 561 U.S. 661 (2010) Christian Legal Society Chapter of the University of California, Hastings College of Law v. Martinez
* 561 U.S. 742 (2010) McDonald v. City of Chicago
* 561 U.S. 945 (2010) Sears v. Upton (per curiam)
* 561 U.S. 1301 (2010) Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Scott (Scalia, Cir. J.)
* 561 U.S. 1306 (2010) Lux v. Rodrigues (Roberts, Cir. J.)