UNITED STATES

v.

CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA

Citator

Cited By

• City of Houston v. Hill, 482 U.S. 451 (U.S. 1987)
  ….” Id., at 1113-1114.5 The city appealed, claiming that the Court of Appeals erred in holding the ordinance facially overbroad and in not abstaining until the ordinance had been construed by the [*458] state courts.6 We noted probable jurisdiction, 479 U. S. 811 (1986), and now affirm. hH HH The elements of First Amendment overbreadth analysis are familiar. Only a statute that is substantially overbroad may be invalidated on its face. New York v. Ferber, 458 U. S. 747, 769 (1982); Broadrick v. Oklahoma, s…
• Welch v. Tex. Dep't of Highways & Pub. Transp., 483 U.S. 468 (U.S. 1987)
  …ntion in the Jones Act. The court also held that Texas has not consented to suit under the Jones Act. 780 F. 2d, at 1273-1274 (citing Lyons v. Texas A & M University, 545 S. W. 2d 56 (Tex. Civ. App. 1976), writ refused, n.r.e. We granted certiorari, 479 U. S. 811 (1986), and now affirm. II The Eleventh Amendment provides: “The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another St…
• United States v. Johnson, 481 U.S. 681 (U.S. 1987)
  …adigm” as identified by the court, finding that because “Johnson’s injury was undoubtedly sustained incident to service, . . . under current law our decision ought to be a relatively straightforward affirmance.” Id., at 1494. We granted certiorari, 479 U. S. 811 (1986), to review the Court of Appeals’ reformulation of the Feres doctrine and to resolve the conflict among the Circuits on the issue.4 We now reverse. [*686] I — I I — I In Feres, this Court held that service members cannot bring tort suits agai…