The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday clarified the criteria for using state law convictions to impose enhanced federal sentences, ruling that a prior crime can be used "only if its elements are the same as, or narrower than, those of the generic offense." In a 5-3 opinion authored by Justice Kagan, the court reversed a lower court decision in Mathis v. United States. That decision had allowed inclusion of a burglary conviction under Iowa law to trigger Armed Career Criminal Act sentence enhancements. The majority opinion found the Iowa statute covered a broader range of conduct than that covered by generic burglary and set out alternative ways of satisfying the locational elements of the crime, according to a report in Jurist.

States may not prosecute suspected drunken drivers for refusing warrantless blood draws when they are arrested, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today in a 7-1 opinion that found such tests violate the Fourth Amendment, the ABA Journal reports. The court did find, however, that states may require a warrantless breath test because such tests are less intrusive. The ruling affects laws in Tennessee and 10 other states where drivers who refuse blood tests can face penalties beyond having their licenses revoked, NewsChannel 9 reports.

The U.S. Supreme Court issued five decisions Monday, including rulings (1) upholding a patent review procedure known as inter partes review, which has been used by Apple and Google to invalidate patents; (2) directing lower courts in Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi to re-examine three convictions for evidence of racial prejudice in jury selection; and (3) directing the U.S. Labor Department to do a better job of explaining why it is changing a longstanding policy on whether certain workers deserve overtime pay. With just one week left in the court’s current term, however, the most contentious cases still need to be resolved, including regulation of Texas abortion clinics, the use of race in college admissions, the legality of the president’s immigration executive orders, and the public corruption conviction of Virginia’s former governor. WKRN looks at the remaining cases.

The U.S. Supreme Court today ruled 5-3 that police can seize evidence from what would otherwise be an unconstitutional search if they first discover that the suspect has one or more outstanding arrest warrants. Opponents of the decision cited the fact that, in some cities, thousands of people have arrest warrants pending against them, mostly for traffic violations as insignificant as unpaid parking tickets. In a strongly-worded dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said, “The court today holds that the discovery of a warrant for an unpaid parking ticket will forgive a police officer’s violation of your Fourth Amendment rights.” The Commercial Appeal has the story.

The U.S. Supreme Court today declined to hear a case challenging gun control laws enacted in the wake of the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut. The decision, handed down with no additional explanation as to the court’s reasoning, allows assault weapons bans to stand in New York and Connecticut. Gun rights groups had challenged laws in those states banning certain semi-automatic weapons and restrictions on bullet magazines. The Commercial Appeal has more.

The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday revived a $2 million fee dispute for attorneys who argued for the winner in a 2013 copyright case over resold textbooks. The Justices unanimously agreed that that federal courts should examine a variety of factors in deciding whether to award fees to winners in copyright infringement cases and sent the case back to a lower court for a new ruling. Read more from The New York Times. 

Politico reports that a ruling issued today by the U.S. Supreme Court will permit more businesses to challenge the Clean Water Act. The court unanimously ruled in U.S. Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co. Inc. that Army Corps of Engineers wetland determinations are reviewable by courts.

“Eight, as you know, is not a good number for a multi-member court,” according to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who remarked on the court’s unfilled vacancy at the conference for the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Ginsburg added that when the court is evenly divided “that means no opinions and no precedential value.” Read more from the ABA Journal. 

Even the nation’s High Court is not immune to “gender dynamics” when it comes to men cutting off women, Mother Jones reports. Research on the legal blog Empirical SCOTUS revealed male justices are more likely to cut off their colleagues. The data also showed the court's two youngest female justices, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, were the most likely to be interrupted. Justice Clarence Thomas never interrupted or got interrupted during this term’s oral arguments. 

The U.S. Supreme Court today ruled in favor of a black death-row inmate's claim of racial bias in jury selection. The 7-1 verdict, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, said prosecutors unconstitutionally barred all potential black jurors from the Georgia man’s trial nearly 30 years ago. Defense attorneys later discovered the bias through a series of prosecution notes obtained through an open-records request. USA Today notes that this happened one year after the court’s landmark 1986 ruling in Batson v. Kentucky that declared such actions unconstitutional.