- Anza v. Ideal Steel Supply Corp. 547 U. S. 451 (2006) (A judgment reversing dismissal of respondent's Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) claims against a competing company is reversed in part where a 18 U.S.C. section 1962(c) claim did not satisfy the requirement of proximate causation with regards to a claim that respondent lost sales due to petitioners' decreased prices, which allegedly resulted from their tax fraud.)
- CITIZENS BANK v. ALAFABCO, INC. 539 U. S. 52 (2003) (A debt-restructuring agreement had a sufficient nexus with interstate commerce to make an arbitration provision in that agreement enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act.)
- DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno 547 U. S. 332 (2006) (In a suit brought by taxpayers alleging that their local and state tax burdens were increased by certain taxbreaks for a car manufacturer, a judgment finding that a state tax credit violated the Commerce Clause is vacated where plaintiffs had no standing to challenge the state franchise tax credit.)
- Granholm v. Heald 544 U. S. 460 (2005) (Michigan and New York state laws, which regulate the sale of wine from out-of-state wineries to in-state consumers, discriminate against interstate commerce in violation of the Commerce Clause, and that discrimination is neither authorized nor permitted by the Twenty-first Amendment.)
- HILLSIDE DAIRY INC. v. LYONS 539 U. S. 59 (2003) (California's milk pricing and pooling regulations are not exempted from Commerce Clause scrutiny by the Federal Agriculture and Reform Act of 1996. Absence of an express statement identifying out-of-state residency or citizenship as a basis for disparate treatment is not a sufficient basis for rejecting Privileges and Immunities Clause claims.)
- KOONS BUICK PONTIAC GMC, INC. v. NIGH 543 U. S. 50 (2004) (A 1995 amendment to the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), which raises the minimum and maximum recoveries for violations of TILA prescriptions governing closed-end loans secured by real property, does not alter the minimum and maximum recovery amounts for violations involving personal-property loans.)
- Leegin Creative Leather Prods., Inc. v. PSKS, Inc. ___ U. S. ___ (2007) (Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co., 220 U. S. 373, which makes it per se illegal under section 1 of the Sherman Act for a manufacturer and its distributor to agree on the minimum price the distributor can charge for the manufacturer's goods, is overruled. Vertical price restraints are to be judged by the rule of reason.)
- Rapanos v. US 547 U. S. 715 (2006) (In cases involving certain state wetlands lying near ditches or man-made drains that eventually empty into traditional navigable waters, judgments against petitioners-landowners are vacated and remanded for further proceedings as to whether the specific wetlands at issue possessed a significant nexus with navigable waters for purposes of regulation under the Clean Water Act (CWA).)
- Rowe v. New Hampshire Motor Transp. Ass'n ___ U. S. ___ (2008) (A federal statute that prohibits states from enacting any law "related to" a motor carrier "price, route, or service" preempts two provisions of a Maine tobacco law, which regulate the delivery of tobacco to customers within the state.)
- Sinochem Int'l Co. Ltd. v. Malaysia Int'l Shipping Corp. ___ U. S. ___ (2007) (A district court has discretion to respond at once to a defendant's forum non conveniens plea, and need not take up first any other threshold objection. In particular, a court need not resolve whether it has authority to adjudicate the cause (subject-matter jurisdiction) or personal jurisdiction over the defendant if it determines that, in any event, a foreign tribunal is the more suitable arbiter of the merits of the case.)
- Texaco v. Dagher 547 U. S. 1 (2006) (It is not per se illegal under section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. section 1, for a lawful, economically integrated joint venture to set the prices at which it sells its products.)
- United Haulers Ass'n, Inc. v. Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Mgmt. Auth. ___ U. S. ___ (2007) (In a suit brought by a trade association and individual haulers under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 alleging that certain counties' flow control ordinances involving solid waste disposal violated the Commerce Clause, the ordinances are upheld as, while the ordinances benefit a clearly public facility, they treat in-state private business interests exactly the same as out-of-state ones, and thus do not "discriminate against interstate commerce" for purposes of the dormant Commerce Clause.)
- Weyerhauser Co. v. Ross-Simmons Hardwood Lumber Co., Inc. ___ U. S. ___ (200) In the antitrust context of Section 2 of the Sherman Act, the test the Court applied to claims of predatory pricing in Brooke Group Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 509 U.S. 209 (1993), also applies to claims of predatory bidding, which involves the exercise of market power on the buy side or input side of a market to drive the price of a critical input to high levels.
- YELLOW TRANSP., INC. v. MICHIGAN 537 U. S. 36 (2002) (The Interstate Commerce Commission's interpretation of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act's fee-cap provision is consistent with the language of that statute and reasonably resolves ambiguity therein, thus that interpretation must receive deference under Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837.)