Amerika Birleşik Devletleri'ndeki emsal kararlar listesi

listede amerika birleşik devletleri'ndeki emsal kararlar kısmi olarak yer almaktadır. emsal kararlar, kayda değer bir yeni hukuk ilkesi ya da görüşü getiren veya mevcut hukukun uygulanışını önemli derecede değiştiren kararlardır. söz konusu kararlar mevcut hukuku birden fazla şekilde etkileyebilirler:

 önceki görüşü geliştiren ayırt edici yeni bir görüş ortaya koyabilirler. böylece stare decisis kuralını ihlal etmeden önceki uygulamadan ayrılabilirler.
 mahkemelerin gelecekte verecekleri kararlarda kullanabilecekleri bir “test” ya da ölçülebilir standart getirebilirler.

amerika birleşik devletleri'nde emsal kararlar çoğunlukla yüce mahkeme tarafından verilmektedir. amerika birleşik devletleri temyiz mahkemeleri de özellikle yüce mahkeme davaya bakmayı reddederse veya alt mahkemenin kararını benimserse bu tür kararlar verebilirler. fakat eyalet yüce mahkemelerinin pek çok kararı söz konusu eyaletin hukukunu şekillendirdiğinden sadece çok azı diğer eyalet mahkemelerinin de sonradan takip edeceği devrimsel standartlar getirmektedir.

bireysel haklar

irk ve etnik köken konusunda ayrımcılık 
 dred scott v. sandford, 
 civil rights cases, 
 plessy v. ferguson, 
 smith v. allwright, 
 korematsu v. united states, 
 morgan v. virginia, 
 shelley v. kraemer, 
 henderson v. united states, 
 brown v. board of education, 
 bolling v. sharpe, 
 sarah keys v. carolina coach company, 64 mcc 769 (1955)
 browder v. gayle, 142 f. supp. 707 (m.d. ala. 1956)
 gomillion v. lightfoot, 
 boynton v. virginia, 
 garner v. louisiana, 
 loving v. virginia, 
 jones v. alfred h. mayer co., 
 swann v. charlotte-mecklenburg board of education, 
 gates v. collier, 501 f. 2d 1291 (5th cir. 1974)
 regents of the university of california v. bakke, 
 batson v. kentucky, 
 adarand constructors, inc. v. peña, 
 grutter v. bollinger, 
 schuette v. coalition to defend affirmative action,

cinsiyet konusunda ayrımcılık 
 muller v. oregon, 
 phillips v. martin marietta corp., 
 reed v. reed, 
 frontiero v. richardson, 
 craig v. boren, 
 j.e.b. v. alabama ex rel. t.b., 
 united states v. virginia,

cinsel tercih konusunda ayrımcılık 
 bowers v. hardwick, 
 romer v. evans, 
 lawrence v. texas, 
 goodridge v. department of public health, 440 mass. 309 (2003)
 united states v. windsor, 
 obergefell v. hodges,

doğum kontrolü ve kürtaj 
 griswold v. connecticut, 
 eisenstadt v. baird, 
 roe v. wade, 
 carey v. population services international, 
 planned parenthood of southeastern pennsylvania v. casey, 
 stenberg v. carhart, 
 gonzales v. carhart, 
 burwell v. hobby lobby stores, inc.,

yaşama son verme 
 cruzan v. director, missouri department of health, 
 washington v. glucksberg, 
 vacco v. quill, 
 gonzales v. oregon,

kongre'nin vatandaşlık haklarını icra etme yetkisi 
 heart of atlanta motel, inc. v. united states, 
 katzenbach v. mcclung, 
 south carolina v. katzenbach, 
 katzenbach v. morgan, 
 city of boerne v. flores, 
 shelby county v. holder,

diğer alanlar 
 corfield v. coryell, 6 fed. cas. 546 (c.c.e.d. pa. 1823) 
 ex parte milligan, 
 crandall v. nevada, 
 united states v. wong kim ark, 
 united states v. wheeler, 
 reid v. covert, 
 united states v. guest, 
 afroyim v. rusk, 
 o'connor v. donaldson,

ceza hukuku

arama emri olmaksızın kişilerin aranamaması ve belgelere el konulamaması 
 mapp v. ohio, 
 katz v. united states, 
 terry v. ohio, 
 bivens v. six unknown named agents, 
 united states v. united states district court for the eastern district of michigan, 
 illinois v. gates, 
 new jersey v. t. l. o., 
 vernonia school district 47j v. acton, 
 georgia v. randolph, 
 in re directives, (2008)
 united states v. jones, 
 riley v. california,

müdafi talep hakkı 
 glasser v. united states, 
 betts v. brady, 
 gideon v. wainwright, 
 escobedo v. illinois, 
 miranda v. arizona, 
 in re gault, 
 michigan v. jackson, 
 montejo v. louisiana,

avukatlar konusunda diğer haklar 
 strickland v. washington, 
 padilla v. kentucky,

sessiz kalma hakkı 
 berghuis v. thompkins, 
 salinas v. texas,

ehliyet 
 dusky v. united states, 
 rogers v. okin, 478 f. supp. 1342 (d. mass. 1979)
 ford v. wainwright, 
 godinez v. moran,

terör şüphelilerinin alıkonması 
 rasul v. bush, 
 hamdi v. rumsfeld, 
 hamdan v. rumsfeld, 
 boumediene v. bush,

ölüm cezası 

 furman v. georgia, 
 gregg v. georgia, 
 proffitt v. florida, 
 jurek v. texas, 
 woodson v. north carolina, 
 roberts v. louisiana, 
 coker v. georgia, 
 enmund v. florida, 
 ford v. wainwright, 
 breard v. greene, 
 atkins v. virginia, 
 roper v. simmons, 
 baze v. rees, 
 kennedy v. louisiana,

diğer ceza yaptırımları 
 apprendi v. new jersey, 
 graham v. florida, 
 miller v. alabama,

federalizm 

 chisholm v. georgia, 
 hylton v. united states, 
 ware v. hylton, 
 marbury v. madison, 
 fletcher v. peck, 
 martin v. hunter's lessee, 
 mcculloch v. maryland, 
 gibbons v. ogden, 
 barron v. baltimore, 
 cooley v. board of wardens, 
 ableman v. booth, 
 texas v. white, 
 pollock v. farmers' loan & trust co., 
 swift and company v. united states, 
 ex parte young, 
 missouri v. holland, 
 united states v. wheeler, 
 national labor relations board v. jones & laughlin steel corporation, 
 steward machine company v. davis, 
 united states v. darby lumber co., 
 wickard v. filburn, 
 cooper v. aaron, 
 oregon v. mitchell, 
 heath v. alabama, 
 south dakota v. dole, 
 united states v. lopez, 
 u.s. term limits, inc. v. thornton, 
 printz v. united states, 
 clinton v. city of new york, 
 united states v. morrison, 
 gonzales v. raich, 
 arizona v. united states, 
 national federation of independent business v. sebelius,

first amendment hakları

i̇fade ve basın özgürlüğü 

 mutual film corporation v. industrial commission of ohio, 
 schenck v. united states, 
 gitlow v. new york, 
 stromberg v. california, 
 near v. minnesota, 
 chaplinsky v. new hampshire, 
 joseph burstyn, inc. v. wilson, 
 roth v. united states, 
 one, inc. v. olesen, 
 new york times co. v. sullivan, 
 curtis publishing co. v. butts, 
 united states v. o'brien, 
 tinker v. des moines independent community school district, 
 brandenburg v. ohio, 
 cohen v. california, 
 new york times co. v. united states, 
 miller v. california, 
 gertz v. robert welch, inc., 
 buckley v. valeo, 
 federal communications commission v. pacifica foundation, 
 new york v. ferber, 
 bethel school district v. fraser, 
 hazelwood v. kuhlmeier, 
 hustler magazine v. falwell, 
 texas v. johnson, 
 barnes v. glen theatre, inc., 
 reno v. american civil liberties union, 
 citizens united v. federal election commission, 
 snyder v. phelps, 
 brown v. entertainment merchants association, 
 mccutcheon v. federal election commission,

i̇nanç özgürlüğü 

 reynolds v. united states, 
 davis v. beason, 
 cantwell v. connecticut, 
 minersville school district v. gobitis, 
 murdock v. pennsylvania, 
 west virginia state board of education v. barnette, 
 everson v. board of education, 
 mccollum v. board of education, 
 engel v. vitale, 
 abington school district v. schempp, 
 flast v. cohen, 
 lemon v. kurtzman, 
 wisconsin v. yoder, 
 marsh v. chambers, 
 edwards v. aguillard, 
 employment division v. smith, 
 lee v. weisman, 
 church of lukumi babalu aye v. city of hialeah, 
 rosenberger v. university of virginia, 
 agostini v. felton, 
 santa fe independent school district v. doe, 
 zelman v. simmons-harris, 
 kitzmiller v. dover area school district, 400 f. supp. 2d 707 (m.d. pa. 2005)
 hosanna-tabor evangelical lutheran church and school v. equal employment opportunity commission, 
 town of greece v. galloway, 
 burwell v. hobby lobby stores, inc.,

birlik kurma hakkı 
 national association for the advancement of colored people v. alabama, 
 hurley v. irish-american gay, lesbian, and bisexual group of boston, 
 boy scouts of america v. dale,

dilekçe hakkı 

 edwards v. south carolina, 
 california motor transport co. v. trucking unlimited,

second amendment hakları 

 united states v. cruikshank, 
 presser v. illinois, 
 united states v. miller, 
 district of columbia v. heller, 
 mcdonald v. chicago,

diğer alanlar 
 dartmouth college v. woodward, 
 johnson v. m'intosh, 
 slaughter-house cases, 
 allgeyer v. louisiana, 
 the paquete habana, 
 lone wolf v. hitchcock, 
 lochner v. new york, 
 selective draft law cases, 
 dillon v. gloss, 
 village of euclid v. ambler realty co., 
 gregory v. helvering, 
 brown v. mississippi, 
 united states v. curtiss-wright export corp., 
 west coast hotel co. v. parrish, 
 erie railroad co. v. tompkins, 
 coleman v. miller, ü
 international shoe co. v. washington, 
 youngstown sheet & tube co. v. sawyer, 
 reid v. covert, 
 williams v. lee, 
 baker v. carr, 
 wesberry v. sanders, 
 reynolds v. sims, 
 harper v. virginia state board of elections, 
 menominee tribe v. united states, 
 goldberg v. kelly, 
 san antonio independent school district v. rodriguez, 
 oneida indian nation of new york v. county of oneida, 
 united states v. nixon, 
 mathews v. eldridge, 
 nixon v. general services administration, 
 sony corp. of america v. universal city studios, inc., 
 chevron u.s.a., inc. v. natural resources defense council, inc., 
 selle v. gibb, 741 f. 2d 896 (7th cir. 1984)
 feist publications, inc. v. rural telephone service company, inc., 
 daubert v. merrell dow pharmaceuticals, 
 dolan v. city of tigard, 
 clinton v. jones, 
 bush v. gore, 
 kelo v. city of new london, 
 massachusetts v. environmental protection agency, 
 medellín v. texas, 
 association for molecular pathology v. myriad genetics, inc., 

emsal kararlar