509 U.S. 579 (1993) Cited 21,107 times 195 Legal Analyses
Holding that Fed. R. Evid. 702 authorizes a "preliminary assessment of whether the reasoning or methodology underlying the testimony [of an expert] is scientifically valid and of whether that reasoning or methodology properly can be applied to the facts in issue"
561 U.S. 1 (2010) Cited 656 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs cannot prevail in a vagueness challenge by "pointing to hypothetical situations designed to test the limits" of certain statutory terms, when their own case presented no such problem
436 U.S. 775 (1978) Cited 253 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that the cross-ownership rules do not "condition receipt of a broadcast license upon forfeiture of the right to publish a newspaper" because even "[u]nder the regulations, . . . a newspaper owner need not forfeit anything in order to acquire a license for a station located in another community"
Holding that the government had not borne its burden under intermediate scrutiny because “the District needs to present some meaningful evidence, not mere assertions, to justify its predictive judgments”
Fed. R. Evid. 201 Cited 21,941 times 27 Legal Analyses
Holding "[n]ormally, in deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, courts must limit their inquiry to the facts stated in the complaint and the documents either attached to or incorporated in the complaint. However, courts may also consider matters of which they may take judicial notice."