Thursday, June 29, 2006
U.S. Supreme Court Says State can Keep Newspapers from Troublesome Inmates
FindLaw reports, “The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that Pennsylvania officials did not violate the free-speech rights of troublesome inmates by keeping secular newspapers and magazines away from them.” According to the report, “Justices, by a 6-2 vote, said the state could use newspapers as incentives to get inmates in a high-security unit to behave themselves.”
U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Most of Texas Redistricting Plan, Throws Out a Part Affecting Minorities
“The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld most of the pro-Republican Texas congressional map engineered by former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay and freed all states to draw new political boundaries as often as they want.” However, according to FindLaw, the Court said that part of the new Texas map failed to protect minority voting rights, a small victory for Democratic and minority groups who accused Republicans of an unconstitutional power grab in drawing boundaries that booted four Democrats from office.
Tennessee Inmate Spared From Execution
“A death row inmate convicted of murdering seven people was spared a lethal injection when federal courts declined to overrule a stay, frustrating the state's plan for back-to-back executions.” The Washington Post reports, “Despite repeated efforts by the state attorney general's office to be allowed to execute Paul Dennis Reid before his execution order expired at 11:59 p.m. Wednesday, a federal appeals court and the U.S. Supreme Court did not intervene.”
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Justices Reject Campaign Limits in Vermont Case
“Vermont's limits on campaign contributions and on campaign spending by candidates are unconstitutional, the Supreme Court ruled on Monday in a splintered 6-to-3 decision suggesting that efforts to limit the role of money in politics might face considerable resistance in the Roberts court,” reports The New York Times.
Justices Uphold Basic Right to Choose Defense Lawyers
The New York Times reports, “The right to hire a lawyer of one's choice is so basic that a defendant who has been wrongly forced to accept a different lawyer is entitled to have a conviction overturned, the Supreme Court ruled on Monday, 5 to 4.”
Tuesday, June 20, 2006
Justices Draw a Line on What Evidence is Admissible
USA Today reports, “An alleged crime victim's emergency 911 call can be used at trial even if he or she does not testify and undergo cross-examination, a unanimous Supreme Court ruled Monday.” “However,” according to the report, “by an 8-1 vote, the justices also ruled that if an alleged victim recounts an incident to police at the scene after it occurs, the account cannot be used at trial unless the defendant is able to cross-examine the accuser.”
Justices Accept Another Abortion Case
CNN reports, “The Supreme Court has accepted a second case testing the constitutionality of a federal law banning a specific, controversial late-term abortion procedure critics call ‘partial birth’ abortion.” According to the report, “The cases could provide a judicial sea change, with the key vote perhaps coming from the high court's newest member, Justice Samuel Alito.”
Monday, June 19, 2006
Court Splits Over Wetlands Protections
“The Supreme Court restricted the federal government's power to regulate wetlands today in a decision that is likely to disappoint environmental groups and hearten land developers,” reports The New York Times. According to the report, “By 5 to 4, the justices overturned lower court judgments against two Michigan land owners who had run afoul of the Clean Water Act over their plans to build a shopping mall and condominiums.”
Court Splits Over Wetlands Protections
“The Supreme Court restricted the federal government's power to regulate wetlands today in a decision that is likely to disappoint environmental groups and hearten land developers,” reports The New York Times. According to the report, “By 5 to 4, the justices overturned lower court judgments against two Michigan land owners who had run afoul of the Clean Water Act over their plans to build a shopping mall and condominiums.”
Wal-Mart Didn't Violate Druggist's Right to Refuse to Dispense Birth Control
“Wal-Mart did not violate a pharmacist's civil rights when it fired him for refusing on religious grounds to fill prescriptions for contraceptives and failing to arrange fill-in help for customers, a federal judge in Madison, Wis., has ruled.” According to FindLaw, “Although the company was willing to accommodate plaintiff Neil Noesen's religious beliefs by allowing him to refuse to fill contraceptive prescriptions, it could not reasonably allow him to place telephone customers on hold indefinitely or walk away from in-store customers without notifying another pharmacist to fill in, Judge John Shabaz concluded.”
Friday, June 16, 2006
Supreme Court Upholds Police Evidence in Searches Without Knocking
FindLaw reports, “The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that police armed with a warrant can barge into homes and seize evidence even if they don't knock, a huge U.S. government victory that was decided by President George W. Bush's new justices.” According to the report, “The case tested previous court rulings that police armed with warrants generally must knock and announce themselves or they run afoul of the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches.”
Court: 15-Year-Old Girls Can Marry
“A 15-year-old girl can enter into a common-law marriage in Colorado, a state appeals court ruled Thursday.” According to The Associated Press, “While the three-judge panel stopped short of setting a specific minimum age for such marriages, it said they could be legal for girls at 12 and boys at 14 under English common law, which Colorado recognizes.”
Judge Rules That U.S. Has Broad Powers to Detain Noncitizens Indefinitely
“A federal judge in Brooklyn ruled yesterday that the government has wide latitude under immigration law to detain noncitizens on the basis of religion, race or national origin, and to hold them indefinitely without explanation.” According to The New York Times, “The ruling came in a class-action lawsuit by Muslim immigrants detained after 9/11, and it dismissed several key claims the detainees had made against the government.”
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
Judge Rejects Atheist's Lawsuit
According to The Seattle Post Intelligencer, “A federal judge on Monday rejected a lawsuit from an atheist who said having the phrase ‘In God We Trust’ on U.S. coins and dollar bills violated his First Amendment rights.”
Justices Issue Key Death Penalty Rulings
“Two death row inmates won separate victories in the Supreme Court Monday -- one hoping to prove he did not commit a 1985 Tennessee murder, the other seeking to show that lethal injection methods used in Florida are cruel and unusual punishment,” reports CNN. According to the report, “The justices offered narrow rulings in both cases, and made clear many capital prisoners who file similar last-minute appeals probably would not win stays of execution.”
Monday, June 12, 2006
Divided Appeals Court Sides with Bush Administration on Wiretap Issue
“A federal appeals court sided with the Bush administration Friday on an electronic surveillance issue, making it easier to tap into Internet phone calls and broadband transmissions,” reports FindLaw. “The court ruled 2-1 in favor of the Federal Communications Commission, which says equipment using the new technologies must be able to accommodate police wiretaps under the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, known as CALEA.”
Virginia Death Row Inmate Wins New Trial
“The Virginia Supreme Court on Thursday ordered a new trial to determine whether a death row inmate is mentally retarded and therefore ineligible for capital punishment,” reports The Associated Press. “The inmate, Daryl Atkins, was at the heart of the landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2002 that executing the retarded is unconstitutional.”
Monday, June 05, 2006
Roberts: 'The Hard Part is Coming Up'
“The Supreme Court has shown a surprising degree of unanimity and harmony since Chief Justice John Roberts took over last fall.” But according to CNN, “recent signs of tension and a rush to finish the court's work by month's end could fray the justices' tenuous show of unity.”
|
|
