A Review of the Supreme Court’s 2013-2014 Term


The United States Supreme Court concluded its 2013-2014 term by issuing decisions in several highly publicized employment and employee benefits cases during the Court’s final scheduled sessions, including Noel Canning, Harris, and Hobby Lobby. Overall, the Roberts Court continued to validate its pro-business reputation in labor, employment and employee benefits cases, with employers and plan sponsors prevailing more often than not, including in several key cases. But the Court also issued a handful of decisions that were favorable to employees.

While the predominantly pro-business results were not a surprise, the vote counts of the Justices in the cases were certainly unexpected. In a substantial departure from previous terms, the Court’s conservative and liberal wings were frequently in agreement. Of the 10 decisions during the 2013-2014 term, six were unanimous, and only two were by a vote of 5 to 4. This represents a complete reversal from the Court’s 2012-2013 term, in which six of the 11 employment-related decisions were 5-4, and only two were unanimous. And the Court’s unanimity was not limited to employment-related decisions. According to SCOTUSblog, the Court issued unanimous opinions in 66% of all cases during this year’s term, the highest percentage in any term since World War II. The Court’s decisions during the 2013-2014 term also display an increased willingness by the Justices to issue narrow rulings that focus on the specific factual situations that are presented, rather than broad rulings that reach well beyond the facts of a particular case. While some commentators have applauded the Court’s exercise of “judicial restraint,” others expect the narrow rulings to spur future litigation.

Please see full Publication below for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Franczek Radelet P.C. | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Franczek Radelet P.C. on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.