Question: What is the highest US court that heard both the Marsh v. Chambers and Clinton v. City of New York cases? 

Context paragraphs:
New York City Parents Union: The New York City Parents Union is a student rights advocacy organization, formed in 2011 by President Mona Davids.  According to its mission statement, the group seeks to make high-quality public education available to the children of New York, through "empowering parents, supporting school choice, advocacy, legislation and lawsuits."  It has been at the center of a number of high-profile lawsuits, most notably the case now known as "Davids v. New York", which was closely patterned after a similar case, "Vergara v. California".  "Davids v. New York" was eventually consolidated with a similar suit known as "Wright v. New York" that fellow school reformer Campbell Brown, head of Partnership for Educational Justice, had announced she would file on behalf of seven New York parents.  The "Davids v. New York" lawsuit aims to invalidate New York State teacher-tenure laws, but has since stalled after a California Court of Appeal ruled in April 2016 that "plaintiffs failed to establish that the state's tenure laws violate students' constitutional rights to equal protection".

Line Item Veto Act of 1996: The Line Item Veto Act of 1996 Pub.L.  104–130 was a federal law of the United States that granted the President the power to line-item veto budget bills passed by Congress, but its effect was brief as the act was soon ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Clinton v. City of New York.

Sevso Treasure: The Sevso or Seuso Treasure (Hungarian: "Seuso-kincsek" ; Croatian: "Seusovo blago" ) is a hoard of silver objects (14 items) from the late Roman Empire.  The first pieces appeared on the market in London in 1980, and the treasure was acquired by a consortium headed by Spencer Compton, 7th Marquess of Northampton.  Documentation was provided in which it was stated that the treasure had been found in the Tyre and Sidon regions of Lebanon.  The treasure was put up for sale in New York City in 1990 by Sotheby's, but was halted when the documentation was found to be false, and the governments of Hungary, Yugoslavia and Lebanon made claims of ownership.  The claims of ownership by these countries were rejected by a US court, and the treasure remained in the possession of the Marquess of Northampton.  Scotland Yard still has an open case on the matter.

Swift v. Tyson: Swift v. Tyson, 41 U.S. 1 (1842) , was a case brought in diversity in the Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York on a bill of Exchange accepted in New York in which the Supreme Court of the United States determined that United States federal courts hearing cases brought under their diversity jurisdiction pursuant to the Judiciary Act of 1789 must apply the statutory law of the states when the state legislature of the state in question had spoken on the issue but did not have to apply the state's common law in those cases in which that state's legislature had not spoken on the issue.  The Court's ruling meant that the federal courts, when deciding matters not specifically addressed by the state legislature, had the authority to develop a federal common law.

People v. Marquan M.: People v. Marquan M., 2014 WL 2931482 (Ct.  App.  NY July 1, 2014) was the first case in which a US court weighed the constitutionality of criminalizing cyberbullying.  In "People v. Marquan M.", the New York Court of Appeals struck down an Albany County law that criminalized cyberbullying, declaring its restrictions overly broad and thus in violation of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.

Clinton v. City of New York: Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417 (1998) , is a legal case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the line-item veto as granted in the Line Item Veto Act of 1996 violated the Presentment Clause of the United States Constitution because it impermissibly gave the President of the United States the power to unilaterally amend or repeal parts of statutes that had been duly passed by the United States Congress.  The decision of the Court, in a six-to-three majority, was delivered by Justice John Paul Stevens.

Toolson v. New York Yankees, Inc.: Toolson v. New York Yankees, 346 U.S. 356 (1953), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld, 7–2, the antitrust exemption first granted to Major League Baseball (MLB) three decades earlier in "Federal Baseball Club v. National League".  It was also the first challenge to the reserve clause which prevented free agency, and one of the first cases heard and decided by the Warren Court.

Société des Acadiens v Association of Parents: Société des Acadiens v Association of Parents is a Supreme Court of Canada decision on minority language rights under section 19(2) of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms".  The majority of the Court held that in civil cases in the New Brunswick courts, the parties have the right to use either French or English in all submissions and pleadings.  However, they do not have a right to have the matter heard by a judge who understands them in the language they choose to speak.  It is sufficient if there is simultaneous translation.  In addition to the majority decision, two other justices of the Court held that the parties did have the right to be heard and understood by the judge in the language of their choice, but on the facts of the case, that standard was met.

Marsh v. Chambers: Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783 (1983), was a landmark court case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that government funding for chaplains was constitutional because of the "unique history" of the United States.  Three days before the ratification of the First Amendment in 1791, containing the Establishment clause, the federal legislature authorized hiring a chaplain for opening sessions with prayer.

Judiciary of El Salvador: The judiciary of El Salvador comprises a number of courts in a hierarchy.  The highest court is the Supreme Court of El Salvador, consisting of 4 different chambers, 3 courts of appeal and a constitutional court.  Below the Supreme Court are intermediate appeal courts, with cases heard by panels of three judges.  Below them are the civil and criminal courts of first instance, with cases heard by one judge, but sentencing is carried out by three judges.  At the lowest level are justices of the peace, dealing with cases involving smaller amounts of money or personal disputes.  There is also a Supreme Court for elections.

Supporting paragraphs: Marsh v. Chambers Clinton v. City of New York
Answer: Supreme Court of the United States