-
2006
Term Review IV
For decades conservatives have yearned for control of
the U.S. Supreme Court. For decades, they have been frustrated in
achieving that goal, despite having as many as seven Republican appointees
on the court. This term, though, conservatives seem to have reached the
promised land. With new Chief Justice John Roberts at the helm and Justice
Samuel Alito replacing justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the direction of the
court for this term, at least, has been transformed.
Morning Edition,
July 3, 2007 .
You can also hear Linda Greenhouse of the New York Times discuss the term
just passed on
NPR's Fresh Air, 2 July 2007.
-
2006
Term Review III
The Supreme Court wrapped up its term this week, and
many of its rulings revealed a bitterly divided court. It was the first full
session for the current lineup of nine justices. Weekend Edition
legal affairs commentator Mimi Wesson talks to Liane Hansen about the
rulings. Weekend Edition Sunday,
July 1, 2007.
-
2006
Term Review II
Law professors Jeffrey Rosen and Doug Kmiec discuss decisions from the first
full session of a Supreme Court that now includes Chief Justice John Roberts
and Justice Samuel Alito. All Things
Considered, June 29, 2007.
-
2006
Term Review
The Supreme Court wrapped up its term this week with a bang that
pleased many conservatives. The court delivered decisions that limit
voluntary school desegregation plans, curb student free speech rights and
struck down a key provision of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law.
Weekend Edition Saturday, June 30, 2007.
-
Bring On Gitmo and MCA of 2006
The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday reversed course, deciding to review whether
Guantanamo Bay detainees may go to federal court to challenge their
indefinite confinements. The Bush administration has argued that a new law
strips courts of their jurisdiction to hear detainee cases.
Morning Edition,
June 29, 2007.
-
Analysis of Political Dimensions of Gitmo cert. grant
The Supreme Court's reversal of the Guantanamo cases shows that Bush
administration lawyers played the odds and lost, and that some justices have
run out of patience with the administration.
All Things Considered,
June 29, 2007.
-
Court Ends Ban on Minimum Sale Prices
The Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling allowing manufacturers to set and enforce
minimum prices for their products overturns a nearly century old ban on
resale price agreements in American retailing.
Morning Edition,
June 29, 2007.
-
Court Strikes Use of Race in School Assignment
In a decision with profound implications for the nation's public schools,
the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated two voluntary desegregation plans because
they used race in some students' school assignments in an effort to end
racial isolation or prevent re-segregation.
Morning Edition,
June 29, 2007.
-
Brown 53 years on...
Justices on both sides of the Supreme Court decision cited the landmark 1954
school desegregation case Brown v. Board of Education. But they came to very
different conclusions. The history and legacy of the Brown case is
discussed. Morning Edition,
June 29, 2007.
-
New
Justices, 5-4 Votes, New Directions
The U.S. Supreme Court, with two new appointees
by President Bush, is showing itself to be far more conservative and more
deeply divided than in the recent past – despite Chief Justice Roberts' talk
of consensus. Four out of five cases decided June 25 were 5-4 rulings.
Morning Edition,
June 26, 2007.
-
Federalism and Water Polution
The Supreme Court sided with the Bush Administration and developers Monday,
ruling that the Environmental Protection Agency may transfer authority for
issuing water-pollution permits to states when states show that they can
adequately enforce the Clean Water Act. All
Things Considered, June 25, 2007.
-
Dings to Endangered Species Act
The U.S. Supreme Court sides with developers
and the Bush administration on a ruling that reduces the power of the
federal Endangered Species Act. States will have greater latitude in issuing
building permits and will operate with fewer federal requirements aimed at
protecting endangered species. Morning
Edition, June 26, 2007.
-
The
Roberts Court and Judicial Divisiveness
The U.S. Supreme Court, with two new appointees by
President Bush, is showing itself to be far more conservative and more
deeply divided than in the recent past – despite Chief Justice Roberts' talk
of consensus. Four out of five cases decided June 25 were 5-4 rulings.
Morning Edition,
June 26, 2007.
-
Expression Monday
The Supreme Court ruled Monday on three cases related to the First
Amendment. It struck down limits on some campaign ads, restricted when
taxpayers may sue over government aid to faith groups, and ruled against a
teen and his "Bong Hits for Jesus" banner.
All Things Considered,
June 25, 2007.
-
Sentencing and Recruiting Cases
The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that high school
athletic associations may limit the kind of recruiting of student athletes
that their member schools can do.
The court also ruled that a federal sentence within the official
sentencing guidelines may be presumed to be reasonable by an appeals court.
That tends to hurt defendants appealing for a lower sentence, and could hurt
the attempt by former White House aide I. Lewis
Libby to delay the start of his sentence.
All Things Considered, June 21, 2007.
-
Naked Fees
The Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that a naked
peace demonstrator must pay her own attorney fees. The plaintiff, T.A. Wyner,
is a naturist and outdoorswoman who wanted to put on a nude peace protest at
the park on Valentine's Day. All Things
Considered, June 4, 2007.
-
More
on Discrimination Suit
The nation's high court rules that workers who sue
their employers for sex discrimination must do so promptly. The case stems
from an employer who argued that the decision to pay a female employee less
than her male counterparts was made years earlier. The justices agreed,
setting a statute of limitations. Morning
Edition, May 30, 2007.
-
Justice Limit Discrimination Suits
A Supreme Court ruling Tuesday limits workers' ability
to sue employers for pay discrimination that results from decisions made
years earlier. The decision says employers would otherwise find it difficult
to defend against claims "arising from employment decisions that are long
past." All Things Considered,
May 29, 2007.
-
Parents Can Sue Schools Sans Lawyers
Parents of disabled children won a major victory in
the U.S. Supreme Court, as the justices ruled unanimously that parents do
not have to hire a lawyer to sue a school district over providing an
appropriate education for a child with special needs.
All Things Considered,
May 21, 2007.
-
No
Unreasonable Seizure in Police Chase Case
The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of police
officers involved in high-speed car chases that may cause unintentional
injury. In an 8-to-1 decision, justices ruled that officers are protected
from lawsuits filed by someone who was injured while fleeing police.
All Things Considered,
April 30, 2007.
-
McCain-Finegold Campaign Ad Issue Heard by the Supremes
The Supreme Court hears arguments on whether certain
political ads may be paid for by corporate money under the McCain-Feingold
law.The ads name a specific candidate and run within certain time limits
before an election.
Groups who want to run the ads say their speech should not be restricted.
Campaign finance reformers say the ads should be covered by the law that
limits the political influence of "big money." Morning Edition,
23 April 2007.
-
Court
Upholds Partial Birth Abortion Ban (II)
The Supreme Court has upheld the Partial Birth
Abortion Ban Act, the law prohibiting an abortion procedure known medically
as "intact dilation and extraction." The procedure is performed most often
during the fifth or sixth month of pregnancy.
All Things Considered, April 18, 2007.
-
Court
Upholds Partial Birth Abortion Ban (I)
The Supreme Court votes to uphold a
nationwide ban on a controversial abortion procedure. In a
5-4 ruling, the court determined that the Partial Birth
Abortion Ban Act of 2003 did not violate a woman's right to
an abortion.
Slate
legal analyst Dahlia Lithwick talks about the landmark
decision.
Day to Day,
April 18, 2007.
-
Court
Holds EPA Required to Regulate Tailpipe Emissions
The Supreme Court stood up for the environment in two
major court rulings Monday. One gives the Environmental Protection Agency
the go-ahead to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. The second ruling sends a
rebuke to the owners of dirty coal-fired power plants.
All Things Considered,
April 2, 2007.
-
Supreme Court Denies
cert in Gitmo cases
The Supreme Court refuses to hear an appeal from
Guantanamo Bay detainees who want to challenge their imprisonment. The
refusal to review the federal law delivered a major, though perhaps
temporary, victory to the Bush administration.
All Things Considered, April 2, 2007.
-
Philip Morris and Punitive Damages
The nation's high court has thrown out an $80 million
judgment against tobacco giant Philip Morris. Tuesday, ruling in an Oregon
case, the U.S. Supreme Court said Philip Morris can't be punished for harm
suffered by consumers who are not party to a lawsuit. The 5-4 ruling is a
boost for corporations seeking relief from big punitive damage awards. But
justices refused to impose a formula limiting damages in the future.
Morning Edition,
February 21, 2007.
-
Court
Further Limits Judges' Independent Sentencing Ability
The U.S. Supreme Court's rejection of part of
California's sentencing laws means that the state will likely have to
re-sentence thousands of prisoners. The court reiterated previous rulings
that the constitutional right to a jury trial requires judges to sentence
people based only on the factors that have been addressed by the jury.
All Things Considered,
January 22, 2007
-
Union
Fees, Political Issues, and the First Amendment
The Supreme Court hears arguments on a case challenging how unions may spend
fees paid to them by nonmembers. The question: Can nonmembers decline to
have those fees used for political activities?
Morning Edition, January 10, 2007.
-
Family Members' Buttons Okay at Trial
The Supreme Court rules that a murder conviction should not have been thrown
out because the victim's family wore lapel-pin pictures of the victim to the
trial. The justices ruled that because they'd never set any precedent
on the wearing of such buttons to a trial, an appeals court was not free to
consider whether buttons prejudiced a jury against a defendant.
All Things Considered,
December 11, 2006
-
Oral
Arguments in the Seattle and Louisville School Cases
The Supreme Court hears arguments on whether student placement systems in
Louisville, Ky., and Seattle, Wash., are acceptable ways to maintain racial
diversity -- or are unacceptable quota systems. The programs are being
challenged by parents whose children weren't placed in their preferred
schools. All
Things Considered,
December 4, 2006.
(link to complete oral arguments are
here and
here)
-
Schools and Race ... the Long Legacy of
Brown v. Board
The Supreme Court re-enters the world of school
desegregation on Monday. In cases from Louisville, Ky., and Seattle, the
justices will examine what, if any, steps school boards may use to ensure
that schools are racially mixed. Morning
Edition, December 4, 2006.
-
Oral
Arguments in the Auto Emissions Case
The U.S. Supreme Court tackled the question of global
warming for the first time Wednesday. At issue is whether the Bush
administration can refuse to regulate carbon emissions when the Clean Air
Act specifically mandates regulations of all pollutants that may endanger
public health or welfare, including affects on climate and weather.
All Things Considered,
November 29, 2006.
-
It's
Not "Jumping Jack Flash," but It is a Gas, Gas, Gas
Twelve states and a coalition of environmental groups sued the Bush
administration in 2003 for refusing to issue regulations limiting carbon
emissions from cars and power plants. On Wednesday, the case reaches the
Supreme Court, where justices will hear the arguments on both sides.
Morning Edition, November 29, 2006.
-
Patently... the Court
A case in the Supreme Court today may determine the fate of millions of
inventors' patents. A law says that an invention can't be patented if it is
"obvious," but the definition of "obvious" isn't clear after decades of
litigation. Now, many companies have filed briefs calling for a change to
the rule. Day to Day,
November 28, 2006.
-
More
on Arguments in Stenberg
The Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday on the Partial Birth
Abortion Ban Act. The Constitutional test is whether the ban puts a woman's
health in danger.
Morning Edition,
November 9, 2006.
-
Arguments in the "Partial Birth
Abortion" Cases
The Supreme Court hears arguments on
the constitutionality of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act.
The court had struck down a previous version of the measure
on the grounds that it did not allow for doctors to use
procedures they thought necessary to protect the woman's
health.
The Bush administration argues that the procedure is
never necessary for the woman's health. Opponents say that
doctors and their patients should be allowed to decide which
procedure is best. All
Things Considered,
November 8, 2006.
-
Abortion Redux:
Stenberg II... This Time It's the Feds... and a New
Court
The Supreme Court steps back into the abortion arena Wednesday. The issue is
not the right to have an abortion but whether Congress can ban certain
methods of abortion. Morning Edition,
November 8, 2006.
-
The
Clean Air Act and Scrubbers Go to Court
The Supreme Court hears arguments in a case that tests whether the Clean Air
Act requires power plants and factories to install anti-pollution devices
when they modernize their facilities. Environmentalists contend that an
adverse ruling would open a major loophole in the Clean Air Act.
Morning Edition,
November 1,
2006.
-
Oral
Arguments in the Smoking Case
The U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments in a case to determine how high
punitive damages can go when a state court finds extreme corporate
misconduct. In a suit against Phillip Morris, the company was ordered to pay
$79.5 million for a smoker's death. All
Things Considered, October 31, 2006.
-
Big
Tobacco and Big Damages Visit the Supremes
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments in a case that
could be the culmination of a long-term effort by the
business community to dramatically curtail punitive damages.
At issue is conduct so venal that the Oregon courts called
it outrageous and the movies satirized it in
Thank You
for Smoking.
Morning
Edition, October 31, 2006.The target of the punitive damages in this case is Philip
Morris, the maker of more than half the cigarettes
manufactured in the United States. The company is asking the
Supreme Court to invalidate a $79.5 million punitive-damage
award in a case stemming from the death of one
Oregon smoker.