[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website] heard oral arguments [day call, PDF] in two cases Tuesday. In US v. Bryant [transcript, PDF] the court heard arguments [SCOTUSblog backgrounder] to determine whether a conviction in an Indian tribal court without counsel used to satisfy the predicate offense requirement of 18 USC § 117 [text], which criminalizes domestic assault when the defendant has at least two convictions in a federal, state or Indian tribal court, violates the Sixth Amendment [Cornell LLI materials]. The case arose [Oyez summary] after Michael Bryant, Jr. was convicted on two counts of domestic abuse under § 117 where the two predicate offenses were his convictions in Northern Cheyenne Tribal Court. Bryant moved for dismissal, claiming that the convictions violated the Fifth and Sixth Amendments because they were without counsel. The district court denied the motion, but the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] reversed.

The court also heard arguments in United Health Services v. Escobar [transcript, PDF] to determine whether [SCOTUSblog backgrounder] the “implied certification test” under the False Claims Act [text] is valid and if so does the relevant statute have to explicitly state the conditions of payment that the defendant allegedly failed to meet. The case arose [Oyez summary] when a young girl, Yarushka Rivera, visited Arbour Counseling Services, a counseling center for mental illnesses run by United Health Services (UHS). After receiving a diagnosis and being prescribed medicine for bipolar disorder from unlicensed practitioners, Yarushka died. The parents filed complaints state agencies and then sued UHS under both the federal and state False Claims Acts. The district court held that they did not sufficiently plead the elements of falsity that claims under the False Claims Act require. The court of appeals reversed and held that they did.