Scotusblog reported on a number of cases that will be considered at the Court's October 10 conference. Some have particular significance for local government. By listing these cases, I don't mean to imply that other cases might not have interest, I simply may have missed them. Should certiorari be granted IMLA will consider whether to participate. Kalamazoo County Road Commission v. Deleon 13-1516 Issue: Whether it is an "adverse employment action" for a discrimination claim, or a "materially adverse action" for a retaliation claim, when an employer grants an employee's request for a job transfer. IMLA filed an amicus brief in support of the Road Commission in this case and it is relisted from the Court's last conference. The Court requested the full record from the Michigan court, so there is hope that cert may be granted. Carroll v. Carman 14-212 Issue: (1) Whether, when a police officer approaches a residence to conduct a "knock and talk," the Fourth Amendment requires the officer to go to the "front door" even where it reasonably appears that some other entrance is also customarily used by visitors; and (2) whether the court of appeals erred in holding that such a rule was "clearly established" for purposes of qualified immunity. Johnson v. City of Shelby 13-1318 Issue: (1) Whether a federal complaint is subject to dismissal when it fails to cite the statute authorizing the cause of action; (2) whether the lower federal courts have authority to create pleading requirements for complaints when those requirements are not contained in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and (3) whether a federal complaint should be dismissed when it alleges the elements of a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim, but does not cite 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Association des Éleveurs de Canards et d'Oies du Québec v. Harris 13-1313 Issue: Whether the Commerce Clause allows California to impose a complete ban on the sale of wholesome, USDA-approved poultry products from other States and countries - in this case, foie gras - based solely on the agricultural methods used by out-of-state farmers who raise their animals entirely beyond California's borders. City of Los Angeles v. Patel 13-1175 Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, serves as co-counsel to the respondent in this case. Issue: (1) Whether facial challenges to ordinances and statutes are permitted under the Fourth Amendment; and (2) whether a hotel has an expectation of privacy under the Fourth Amendment in a hotel guest registry where the guest-supplied information is mandated by law and an ordinance authorizes the police to inspect the registry, and if so, whether the ordinance is facially unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment unless it expressly provides for pre-compliance judicial review before the police can inspect the registry. Charles W. Thompson, Jr. Executive Director and General Counsel International Municipal Lawyers Association, Inc. 7910 Woodmont Ave., Suite 1440 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 202-466-5424 x7110 Direct: 202-742-1016 Cell: 240-876-6790 Plan ahead: IMLA's Annual Seminar April 24-27, 2015 - Omni Shoreham, Washington D.C.