The Supreme Court of the United States decided two cases this morning:

Williamson v. Mazda Motor of America, Inc., No. 08-1314: The federal motor vehicle safety standard at issue requires automakers to install seatbelts on the rear seats of passenger vehicles. They must install lap-and-shoulder belts on seats next to a vehicle’s doors or frames, but may install either those belts or simple lap belts on rear inner seats, e.g., those next to a minivan’s aisle. Petitioner brought a state tort suit, claiming a child died in an accident because the rear aisle seat of the Mazda minivan in which she was riding had a lap belt instead of lap-and-shoulder belts. The Supreme Court today held that the federal standard does not pre-empt state tort suits claiming that manufacturers should have installed lap-and-shoulder belts, instead of lap belts, on rear inner seats.

The Court's decision is available here.

Walker v. Martin, No. 09-996: Federal habeas relief is generally unavailable when a state court has previously declined to address a prisoner’s federal claims because the prisoner failed to meet a state procedural requirement, if, among other things, that requirement is "adequate." The Supreme Court today held that California’s timeliness rules, although allowing for the exercise of discretion, and although established through court decisions, are "adequate" and may bar federal habeas relief.

The Court's decision is available here.