June 29, 2004
Court Strikes Down Internet Porn Law, Rejects Foreigner's Human Rights Case
Update: The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday suspended enforcement of a 1998 federal law designed to shield minors from Internet pornography, saying it likely violates the constitutional right to freedom of speech.

In a 5-4 vote, the high court said the law, which was signed by President Clinton and supported by the Bush administration, may unduly restrict access by adults to sexually suggestive, yet constitutionally protected, material.

The law, which never took effect, would have authorized fines up to $50,000 and prison terms of up to six months for placing sexually explicit material deemed "harmful to minors" on commercial Web sites.

Tuesday's decision, however, is not the end of the line for the controversial law. The court sent the case back to a lower court to allow the government the chance to "update the factual record to reflect current technological realities" and prove the law does not compromise First Amendment rights.

The majority, led by Justice Anthony Kennedy, wrote that alternatives, such as blocking and filtering software, is "likely more effective as a means of restricting children's access to materials harmful to them" than the Child Online Protection Act.

In a separate case, the Supreme Court ruled that foreigners cannot use a little-known U.S. law to sue in American courts over human rights abuses.

The decision effectively throws out damages won by a doctor kidnapped in Mexico and brought to the United States to face trial in the death of a federal drug agent. The doctor, Humberto Alvarez-Machain, was acquitted and then used the 1789 law, known as the Alien Tort Claims Act, to sue the people who authorized and executed his abduction.

In a unanimous ruling, the justices agreed that the law does not create a right to bring lawsuits like the one pursued by Alvarez-Machain, saying the doctor's lawsuit belonged in Mexican courts.

The doctor's case prompted the Supreme Court's first ruling on the Alien Tort Claims Act, which has been invoked in other recent cases where alleged victims of international human rights abuses won judgments in U.S. courts.

RealAudio: Marcia Coyle, Washington bureau chief for the National Law Journal, outlines the final two rulings from this term of the Supreme Court.

June 28, 2004
Court Rules Terror Suspects Can Be Held Without Charges, Use U.S. Courts
The Supreme Court delivered a mixed ruling Monday in two tests of President Bush's anti-terrorism policies.

The court said the Bush administration has the authority to hold American citizens or foreign nationals indefinitely in military prisons without charges or trials when they have been labeled "enemy combatants," but the terror suspects can use the American legal system to challenge their detention. In both cases, the ruling was 6-3, though the lineup of justices was different for each.

Margaret Warner discusses the ruling with Deborah Pearlstein, director of the U.S. law and security program at Human Rights First, and Douglas Kmiec, professor of constitutional law at Pepperdine University Law School.

RealAudio: Ray Suarez speaks with Marcia Coyle, Washington bureau chief for the National Law Journal, about the rulings.

June 24, 2004
High Court Sets Aside Cheney Energy Task Force Case
The Supreme Court on Thursday passed back to a lower court the case of whether Vice President Dick Cheney should reveal secret details of his energy task force. The justices said 7-2 that the lower court should consider whether a federal open government law could be used to get the energy task force documents.

Also Thursday, the justices refused to overturn the death penalty sentences of more than 100 inmates who said their fate was improperly decided by judges, not juries. The National Law Journal's Marcia Coyle discusses the decisions.

June 21, 2004
Court Limits Patient Rights to Sue HMOs, Says People Must Give Police Their Names
The Supreme Court unanimously ruled Monday that patients cannot sue their health maintenance organizations under state law for refusing to pay for doctor-recommended care. The high court also ruled, but by a 5-4 vote, that people are required to identify themselves to police, rejecting the argument that it violates their constitutional rights to privacy and to remain silent.

June 14, 2004
Supreme Court Narrowly Allows 'Under God' to Remain in Pledge of Allegiance
In a largely technical ruling, the Supreme Court decided Monday to allow the phrase "one nation, under God" to remain in the Pledge of Allegiance, finding that a California atheist did not have legal standing to file suit against the school district. National Law Journal's Marcia Coyle assesses the scope of the court's decision.

Background on Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow
High Court Weighs Pledge of Allegiance Dispute
Update: The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday in a case involving a dispute over the constitutionality of the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Transcript: Gwen Ifill discusses the case with National Law Journal Washington bureau chief Marcia Coyle.

Read the full text of the lower court ruling in Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow.
(Requires Adobe Acrobat)

May 17, 2004
Court Allows Disabled to Sue States Under Americans With Disabilities Act
The Supreme Court Monday ruled that disabled citizens have the right to sue states and localities if those local governments fail to provide accommodations under the Americans With Disabilities Act. Marcia Coyle, Washington bureau chief for the National Law Journal, explains the decision.

April 28, 2004
High Court Hears Critical Cases Testing Post-9/11 'Enemy Combatant' Detentions
The Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday in two key tests of the Bush administration's anti-terrorism policies, weighing whether American citizens can be held indefinitely in military prisons when they have been labeled "enemy combatants."

The key figures in the cases are both American citizens: Yaser Hamdi is a U.S.-born Saudi-American who was captured during fighting in Afghanistan in 2001 and Jose Padilla is a former Chicago gang member who traveled to Afghanistan and Pakistan before being arrested at a Chicago airport in 2002 on suspicion of plotting to detonate a radioactive "dirty bomb" in the United States.

Margaret Warner reviews the highlights of the day in the high court with Marcia Coyle, Washington bureau chief for the National Law Journal.

Update: High Court Considers Enemy Combatant Detentions

Audio of the Supreme Court Arguments
The high court decided to immediately release audio recordings of its arguments in Wednesday's precedent-setting cases:

Hamdi v. Rumsfeld
RealAudio: Part I: Federal public defender Frank Dunham, for Yaser Hamdi
RealAudio: Part II: Deputy Solicitor General Paul Clement, for the government
RealAudio: Part III: Dunham's closing statements

Rumsfeld v. Padilla
RealAudio: Part I: Deputy Solicitor General Paul Clement, for the government
RealAudio: Part II: Stanford Univ. law professor Jennifer Martinez, for Jose Padilla
RealAudio: Part III: Clement's closing statements

Background on the Hamdi Case
Update: Supreme Court Accepts Case Testing Enemy Combatant Detention
Read a lower court ruling from the 4th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld. (Requires Adobe Acrobat)
Access petitioner's and respondent's briefs and more documents on the Hamdi case (from FindLaw).

Background on the Padilla Case
Transcript: Experts discuss the arrest of Padilla, the man alleged to have plans to build and detonate a radioactive "dirty bomb" in the United States. (6/10/02)
Transcript: Legal experts examine the legal rights and status of three U.S. citizens currently held in connection to the war on terrorism. (6/12/02)
Update: Appeals Court Orders Dirty Bomb Suspect Released
Access petitioner's and respondent's briefs and more documents on the Padilla case (from FindLaw).

April 27, 2004
High Court Hears Arguments in Cheney Energy Task Force Case
The Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday on whether Vice President Dick Cheney should be able to keep his energy task force papers secret, another key case in the high court's current term that tests the limits of executive branch power.

The two groups pressing for the vice president's documents, the Sierra Club and Judicial Watch, sued in 2001 to find out the names and positions of members of the energy task force, which was headed by Cheney that year.

Marcia Coyle, Washington bureau chief for the National Law Journal, outlines key portions of Tuesday's arguments in the Cheney energy task force case with Gwen Ifill.

Audio of the Supreme Court Arguments
The high court decided to immediately release audiotapes of its arguments in Cheney v. U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
RealAudio: Part I: Solicitor General Theodore Olson, representing the government
RealAudio: Part II: Alan Morrison of Public Citizen, representing the Sierra Club
RealAudio: Part III: Paul Orfanedes, representing Judicial Watch
RealAudio: Part IV: Olson's closing statements

Background on the Cheney Case
Read a lower court ruling in Cheney v. U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (requires Adobe Acrobat) or access more documents and writings on the White House Energy Task Force (from FindLaw).

April 20, 2004
Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Guantanamo Detainees' Challenge
The Supreme Court entered the debate over which rights should apply to those held in connection with the U.S. war on terror Tuesday, hearing arguments in two cases questioning whether foreign fighters captured abroad and held in a military camp in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, should be able to challenge their imprisonments in the American court system.

Margaret Warner reviews the day in the high court and key portions of the arguments with Marcia Coyle, Washington bureau chief for the National Law Journal.

Update: Supreme Court Hears Appeal From Guantanamo Detainees

Audio of the Supreme Court Arguments
The high court decided to immediately release audiotapes of its arguments in Rasul v. Bush and Al Odah v. United States, cases that represent the combined appeals of two British, two Australian and 12 Kuwaiti nationals held in Guantanamo.
RealAudio: Part I: Attorney John Gibbons, representing the detainees
RealAudio: Part II: Solicitor General Theodore Olson, representing the government

Background on the Detainees' Challenge
Read the full text of a lower court ruling from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in the Guantanamo cases. (Requires Adobe Acrobat)

Access the petitioners' briefs and the response of the Bush administration on the legal questions presented to the high court on the detainees. (From the American Bar Association; Requires Adobe Acrobat)

March 24, 2004
High Court Weighs Pledge of Allegiance Dispute
Update: The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday in a case involving a dispute over the constitutionality of the words "under God" in the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance.

Transcript: Gwen Ifill discusses the case with National Law Journal Washington bureau chief Marcia Coyle, who attended the argument session.

Read the full text of the lower court ruling in Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow. (Requires Adobe Acrobat)

March 18, 2004
Justice Scalia Rejects Recusal Request in Cheney Energy Case
Update: A defiant Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia refused a request Thursday to remove himself from a case involving his friend, Vice President Dick Cheney, dismissing suggestions of a conflict of interest.

Read the full text of Justice Scalia's memorandum (Requires Adobe Acrobat) or view more documents related to the energy task force case (from FindLaw).

February 25, 2004
Supreme Court Upholds State Ban on Religion Scholarships
Update: The Supreme Court upheld Wednesday government scholarship restrictions that bar any taxpayer money for college students who pursue a degree in theology, an important legal marker in the rules of church-state separation.

Transcript: Marcia Coyle, Washington bureau chief for the National Law Journal, discusses the decision on state-funded scholarships.

Read the full text of the Supreme Court's ruling in Locke v. Davey. (Requires Adobe Acrobat)

January 26, 2004
Supreme Court to Review Execution of Juvenile Killers
The Supreme Court agreed Monday to consider the constitutionality of imposing the death penalty on those who were under 18 when they committed their crimes. The court said it will reopen the question of whether executing young killers violates the Constitution's ban on "cruel and unusual punishment."

January 13, 2004
High Court Hears Arguments in Wheelchair Access Case
The Supreme Court heard arguments in mid-January in a case testing whether private citizens can sue state governments over alleged violations of the 1990 Americans With Disabilities Act. The justices also issued a ruling that police may set up roadblocks to collect tips about crimes, rejecting concerns that authorities might misuse the checkpoints to patrol for unrelated activity.

Jan Crawford Greenburg, Supreme Court reporter for The Chicago Tribune, discusses the decision on police checkpoints and recaps the details and arguments surrounding the disability case.

January 12, 2004
Justice O'Connor Holds Critical Vote in Closely Divided High Court
Some observers call the current Supreme Court the "O'Connor Court" for the pivotal vote Justice Sandra Day O'Connor often casts between the court's closely divided conservative and liberal blocs. Jim Lehrer discusses O'Connor's position on the court and the impact of some of her key votes and opinions with four law professors.

January 12, 2004
Supreme Court Rejects Appeal on Secret Sept. 11 Detainees
The Supreme Court refused Monday to consider whether the government had the proper authority to withhold names and other basic details about hundreds of foreigners detained in the United States in the weeks and months after the Sept. 11 terror attacks.

January 9, 2004
Supreme Court Accepts Case Testing Enemy Combatant Detention
The Supreme Court agreed Friday to decide whether a U.S. citizen seized abroad can be kept indefinitely in a military jail, the latest in a series of legal challenges to the Bush administration's antiterrorism policies.

December 15, 2003
High Court Agrees to Hear Cheney's Energy Task Force Appeal
The Supreme Court agrees to review Vice President Dick Cheney's appeal to keep his energy task force papers secret in a legal battle that has lasted in lower courts for more than two years.

December 10, 2003
Supreme Court Upholds Campaign Finance Reform Law
The Supreme Court upheld important portions of the recently passed Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act in a December ruling. The Chicago Tribune's Jan Crawford Greenburg looks at the key points of the top court's highly anticipated ruling.

Update: A divided Supreme Court upholds most of the campaign finance reform law.

Read the full ruling on McConnell et al v. FEC or view the Supreme Court's page containing briefs and documents related to the campaign reform act cases. (Requires Adobe Acrobat)

December 9, 2003
Supreme Court Evaluates Limits of Miranda Warnings
The Supreme Court heard arguments in two cases Tuesday involving the landmark 37-year-old Miranda ruling, which created the police warning beginning, "You have the right to remain silent."

The Chicago Tribune's Jan Crawford Greenburg discusses the specifics of the cases being evaluated and recaps the day in the high court.

December 2, 2003
High Court Considers Religious Studies Scholarships Case
The state of Washington is asking the Supreme Court to overturn an appeals court ruling that said it must provide taxpayer-funded scholarships to qualified theology students training for the ministry. The Chicago Tribune's Jan Crawford Greenburg discusses the case's opening arguments before the court.

November 12, 2003
High Court Hears Arguments in Age Discrimination Case
The Supreme Court heard arguments in mid-November in a case evaluating the parameters of age discrimination laws in the workplace, including whether companies can legally give older workers better benefits than younger ones.

Jan Crawford Greenburg, Supreme Court reporter for The Chicago Tribune, discusses the age discrimination case's day before the high court.

November 10, 2003
Supreme Court to Hear Guantanamo Detainees' Challenge
The Supreme Court said it would hear appeals by Afghan war detainees challenging their imprisonment at a U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, marking the first time the justices will evaluate the constitutionality of one of the Bush administration's anti-terrorism policies.

Most of the Guantanamo detainees were picked up during the U.S.-led military action taken against the Taliban government and Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida terrorist network in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington .

Read a lower court's decision on the Guantanamo detainees' case. (Requires Adobe Acrobat)

November 3, 2003
Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Drug Arrest Case
The Supreme Court heard arguments Monday in a case testing whether police can arrest all occupants of a vehicle after finding drugs inside, even if they deny ownership of the evidence.

Jan Crawford Greenburg of the Chicago Tribune assesses the day in court and looks at other cases the court will evaluate this week.

October 14, 2003
Supreme Court Declines Marijuana Case
The Supreme Court said Tuesday it would not involve itself in a debate over whether doctors can talk to patients about medical marijuana.

Gwen Ifill gets two perspectives on the controversial decision from Rob Kampia, director of the Marijuana Policy Project, and Dr. Andrea Barthwell, deputy director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy.

October 8, 2003
High Court Hears Workplace Rights Dispute
The Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday in a case testing the workplace rights of recovering addicts and their protections under the landmark Americans with Disabilities Act.

Jan Crawford Greenburg, Supreme Court reporter for The Chicago Tribune, discusses the day in the high court and previews some of the key cases ahead in the new term.

September 8, 2003
Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Campaign Finance Law Challenge
The legalities of political campaign fundraising were examined during a special one-day session of the Supreme Court Monday, when the court heard arguments from eight lawyers on the constitutionality of recently passed campaign finance legislation.

Jan Crawford Greenburg, Supreme Court reporter for the Chicago Tribune, recaps the day in the high court and provides analysis of the main issues at stake.

Update: More on the critical test campaign finance law faces in the Supreme Court review and the history of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, commonly known as the McCain-Feingold law. (9/7/03)

Audio of the Supreme Court Arguments: In a rare move, the high court immediately released audio recordings of Monday's arguments to satisfy public interest in the proceedings. The audio recordings are available on C-SPAN and Northwestern University's Oyez Project.

A transcript of the argument session for McConnell et al. v. FEC is also available from the Supreme Court. (Requires Adobe Acrobat)