Case |
Issue |
Joined by |
|
Raytheon Co. v. Hernandez 540 U.S. 40 (2003) |
|
|
Unanimous |
|
|
Campaign finance reform |
Scalia (in part) |
|
|
Groh v. Ramirez 540 U.S. 551 (2004) |
|
|
Scalia; Rehnquist (in part) |
|
|
General Dynamics Land System v. Cline 540 U.S. 581 (2004) |
|
|
Kennedy |
|
|
|
Rehnquist, Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg |
Scalia filed a dissent. |
|
Banks v. Dretke 540 U.S. 668 (2004) |
|
|
Scalia |
|
|
|
|
Thomas filed one of two dissents from Rehnquist's 7-2 decision. |
|
Raymond B. Yates, M.D., P.C. Profit Sharing Plan v. Hendon 541 U.S. 1 (2004) |
|
|
|
|
|
United States v. Galletti 541 U.S. 114 (2004) |
|
|
Unanimous |
|
|
BedRoc Ltd., LLC v. United States 541 U.S. 176 (2004) |
|
|
Breyer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Household Credit Servs. v. Pfennig 541 U.S. 232 (2004) |
|
|
Unanimous |
|
|
Scarborough v. Principi 541 U.S. 401 (2004) |
|
|
Scalia |
Thomas dissented from Ginsburg's 7-2 decision. |
|
Tennessee Student Assistance Corp. v. Hood 541 U.S. 440 (2004) |
|
Bankruptcy; Eleventh Amendment |
Scalia |
Thomas dissented from Rehnquist's 7-2 decision. |
|
Bankruptcy |
|
|
|
Americans with Disabilities Act; state sovereign immunity |
|
Thomas filed one of three dissents from Stevens' 5-4 decision. |
|
Sabri v. United States 541 U.S. 600 (2004) |
|
|
|
|
|
DOT v. Pub. Citizen 541 U.S. 752 (2004) |
|
|
Unanimous |
|
|
Standing; Establishment Clause |
|
|
|
Pennsylvania State Police v. Suders 542 U.S. 129 (2004) |
|
|
|
Thomas was the sole dissenter from Ginsburg's 8-1 opinion. |
|
|
Unanimous |
|
|
Pliler v. Ford 542 U.S. 225 (2004) |
|
|
Rehnquist, O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy |
Ginsburg and Breyer filed dissents. |
|
|
|
Thomas filed one of three dissents from O'Connor's 6-3 opinion. |
|
|
Scalia |
|
|
|
Rehnquist, O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy |
Stevens and Souter filed dissents. |
|
Due process, habeas corpus |
|
Thomas dissented from the plurality's ruling that citizens of the U.S. designated as enemy combatants by the Executive Branch had the right to challenge their detention. Thomas, the only member of the Court to fully adopt the government's position, argued that the Court should defer to the broad war-making powers of the President, particularly in light of the important security interests at stake in the War on Terror. |
|
|
Rehnquist, Scalia |
Souter and Breyer filed dissents. |