Ohio's Pilot Project Scholarship Program, which provides, inter alia, tuition aid for Cleveland schoolchildren to attend a participating public or private, religious or nonreligious, school of their parent's choosing, does not offend the Establishment Clause.

Respondent Alabama prison guards were not entitled to qualified immunity at the summary judgment phase where reasonable officers would have known that using a hitching post to punish a prisoner under the circumstances alleged by petitioner inmate violated the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

The Minnesota Supreme Court's canon of judicial conduct prohibiting candidates for judicial election from announcing their views on disputed legal and political issues violates the First Amendment.

Petitioner school district's drug testing policy for students participating in extracurricular activities is a reasonable means of furthering the district's important interest in preventing and deterring drug use among its schoolchildren and does not violate the Fourth Amendment.

Respondent National Labor Relations Board lacked authority to find that petitioner violated federal labor law by prosecuting against respondent unions an unsuccessful lawsuit with a retaliatory motive.

Title 18 U. S. C. §924(c)(1)(A) which provides that a person who uses or carries a firearm in relation to a drug trafficking crime shall have the minimum sentence for the underlying crime increased as specified in three subsections defines a single offense, in which the brandishing and discharging of a weapon are sentencing factors to be found by the judge, not offense elements to be found by the jury; §924(c)(1)(A)(ii) which increases the minimum sentence by two years upon a judicial finding of brandishing is constitutional.

Walton v. Arizona, 497 U. S. 639, is irreconcilable with Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U. S. 466, and is, accordingly, overruled to the extent that it allows a sentencing judge, sitting without a jury, to find an aggravating circumstance necessary for imposition of the death penalty, see 497 U. S., at 647-649. Because Arizona's enumerated aggravating factors operate as "the functional equivalent of an element of a greater offense," Apprendi, 530 U. S., at 494, n. 19, the Sixth Amendment requires that they be found by a jury.

The Fifth and Sixth Amendments do not require the Government to disclose material impeachment evidence prior to entering a plea agreement with a criminal defendant.

Respondent's action is foreclosed because the relevant provisions of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 create no personal rights to enforce under 42 U. S. C. §1983.

Executions of mentally retarded criminals are "cruel and unusual punishments" prohibited by the Eighth Amendment.