When a prisoner pursues state post-conviction DNA testing through the state-provided litigation process, when does the statute of limitations for a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 procedural due process claim begin to run?

This case is about what a plaintiff must demonstrate to sustain allegations that police arrested them in retaliation for First Amendment–protected expression. While retaliatory arrest plaintiffs generally must show that police lacked probable cause to arrest them, the petitioner in this case correctly argues that a recognized exception to that rule, for cases where police typically exercise discretion not to arrest people, must be robust to protect the free speech of government critics.

This case concerns whether taking and selling a home to satisfy a debt to the government, and keeping the surplus value as a windfall, violates the Fifth Amendment's takings clause.

This case concerns whether a state prisoner can be barred from challenging a state court’s decision denying his right to inform the jury about relevant sentencing information, where the state court applied a novel rule to bar his ability to present the issue on post-conviction review.