Posted on 06/19/2007 8:34:33 AM PDT by Graybeard58
The U.S. Supreme Court has 11 opinions to issue over the next 10 days or so, including big cases on race in schools, student speech rights and campaign finance.
Nearing the end of its 2006-2007 term, the court will meet on Thursday to issue decisions and then almost certainly again next Monday.
Decisions in major cases often come in a term's final days, although the court already has issued opinions in abortion and global warming cases.
Here's what's left:
Schoos and race: Whether public schools can take race into account in assigning students to schools (Argued Dec. 4).
Issue ads: Whether a federal law impermissibly bars interest groups, corporations and labor unions from broadcasting "issue ads" that mention a candidate's name in the weeks before an election (Argued April 25).
Death penalty: Whether a death row inmate has to understand that his impending execution is the result of the crimes for which he was convicted (Argued April 18).
Student speech: If school administrators can censor student speech that they believe goes against their anti-drug message (Argued March 19).
Faith-based funding: May taxpayers sue in federal court to challenge spending by the White House's faith-based initiative? (Argued Feb. 28).
Shareholder lawsuits: Whether a federal law intended to curb abusive litigation makes it harder for shareholders to sue companies for fraud. (Argued March 28).
Anti-trust: Whether manufacturers and stores can set minimum retail prices for products (Argued March 26).
Endangered species: What measures federal agencies must take to protect endangered species before giving states authority to issue water pollution permits (Argued April 17).
"Death penalty: Whether a death row inmate has to understand that his impending execution is the result of the crimes for which he was convicted."
Duh; "I'm being executed for the axe murders, but they didn't exactly explain that to me!"
Corporations are legal persons per the XIVth Amend. How about interest groups? Labor unions would probably be Corporations of some kind already. How about the Press? Institutions of every imaginable species appear and disappear, but which are persons? All of them? The USSC is merely pounding another nail into the constructed structure of personhood.
I think it must concern mentally retarded people on death row. Not sure, but that’s the only sense I can make out of it.
I see several more 5-4 decisions with Kennedy being the deciding vote. Right now Kennedy has more impact on the law of the land than anyone in this country.
Question — I have heard that the votes are taken immediately after cases are argued, but that many of the decisions are not made public until, for example, June. Is this correct? If so, why do they wait to announce decisions that the judges voted on and decided months earlier? Have they still not finished the paperwork on the 11 decisions still due? — Even the one argued last December?
They have to write the opinions.
Or their aides do. Let's face it, some of them aren't smart enough to write their own.
With the 9th, 5th, and DC courrts in Constitutional Contention re; individual RKBA... these cases ring kind of hollow. Window dressing to try and justify a paycheck.
And then we’ll have to see if either Ginsburg or Stevens decide to retire at this time. Generally if anyone is going to retire from the Supreme Court, they announce it in late June / early July.
If there’s a vacancy will be interesting to see the political battle over a new nominee.
If a vacancy happens this time next year, I could imagine the Democrats filibustering by saying the next president to be elected in Nov. ‘08 should nominate a replacement and let the court be short by a member until their hoped for election of Hillary.
They’re all “mildly retarded”, if you listen to their attorneys. It must burn parents of DD/MR people to see that chestnut every time a killer is on trial.
Schoos and race: Whether public schools can take race into account in assigning students to schools (Argued Dec. 4).
No. Governments in the USA should be blind to ~race~.
Issue ads: Whether a federal law impermissibly bars interest groups, corporations and labor unions from broadcasting "issue ads" that mention a candidate's name in the weeks before an election (Argued April 25).
The 'law' is an unconstitutional infringemet on free speech.
Death penalty: Whether a death row inmate has to understand that his impending execution is the result of the crimes for which he was convicted (Argued April 18).
Mental confusion is no bar to execution.
Student speech: If school administrators can censor student speech that they believe goes against their anti-drug message (Argued March 19).
Government administrators cannot censor free speech.
Faith-based funding: May taxpayers sue in federal court to challenge spending by the White House's faith-based initiative? (Argued Feb. 28).
Yes. Our right to petition for redress of grievances shall not be infringed.
Shareholder lawsuits: Whether a federal law intended to curb abusive litigation makes it harder for shareholders to sue companies for fraud. (Argued March 28).
No 'law' should make it harder to sue for fraud.
Anti-trust: Whether manufacturers and stores can set minimum retail prices for products (Argued March 26).
No. - Free markets and free trade are part of a free republic.
Endangered species: What measures federal agencies must take to protect endangered species before giving states authority to issue water pollution permits (Argued April 17).
Government agencies are limited to enforcing reasonable regulations, using due process of constitutional law on a case by case basis. - No level of government has the power to enact fiat prohibitions on matters affecting life, liberty or property.
We may have a clue as to the fate of parts of
McCain/Feingold.
The 6 - 3 KO of Randell v. Sorrell.
Or people in comas, or who speak a language that no one else in the world can speak, or who “just don’t unnerstand nuttin”, or who are so senile they don’t know what you’re talking about, or who are Supreme Court justices who’ve never read the constitution. . .
Which of these cases do you think is most significant?
I’m torn between “issue ads (mccain/feingold)” and “anti-trust minimum prices.”
The one messes with free speech and the other messes with free markets.
Probably the first is worst.
And it’s scarry to think we might have to rely on him in the DC Gun Ban case if that goes to the high court.
A free market would allow manufacturers and stores to do whatever they want with the price. If customers don’t like it, they can vote with their wallet.
I wonder what kind of Harriet Meirs clone Jorge Arbusto would try and seat this time. After all, if he needs to be a DIM to get his picks in place...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.