Our New Supreme Court

Long after we get rid of George Bush, his legacy will live on in this new composition of the US Supreme Court. By the time this court ended its first full term with the new mix on Thursday, the picture was clear we have seen the court move, in big steps and small, undeniably to the right. Typically, the difference "swing vote "depended upon how Justice Anthony M. Kennedy voted.

*

Here are some snippets:

*

Free Speech:

*Allowed school officials to censor and punish a student who was OFF CAMPUS, during NON SCHOOL TIME, for speech that could arguably (if you did not have a sense of humor) be celebrating the use of illegal drugs, or celebrating possible use of illegal drugs by Jesus...(Bong hits for Jesus.) (Morse v. Frederick)

*On the flip side the court ruled 5-4 that the restrictions on corporate and labor paid advertsiements contained in the 2002 campaign finance law restrictions WERE a threat to free speech and unconstitutional unless narrowly applied only to advertisements that are "susceptable to no reasonable interpreation other than as an appeal to vote for or against a specific candidate." (Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life.)

*

Abortion:

The new court upheld a partial ban on abortion even though there was a case in 2000 which found a quite similar law unconstitutional. (Gonzales v. Carhart)

*

Discrimination:

*This court shortened the statute of limitations for filing a claim for pay discrimination, limiting it to 180 days after the pay is set to allow the discrimination. (Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company)

*This court also struck down the voluntary integration plans of Seattle and Louisville, ruling that using a student's race to determine eligibility for a spot at a desired "magnet" school even to prevent "resegregation" was unconstitutional. (Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District)

* On a brighter note for parents of disabled children, a positive decision related to disability discrimination was however reached by the court's ruling in Winkelman v. Parma City School District that parents of disabled children could go to court without a lawyer to challenge a school district's interpretation of the IDEA. (Who dissented?...take a guess-- the rangers on the right, Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia.) The issue here was whether the parents could go to court without an attorney while advocating for their disabled children.

*

Business:

*A couple of business cases also made it harder for investors to sue companies, executives and underwriters when they suspect securities fraud. The plantiffs in these cases must now show "cogent and compelling evidence" to keep their lawsuit from being dismissed before trial. (Tellabs Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights Ltd.)

*In a significant antitrust decision the court overturned a precedent that is almost 100 years old which used to make it illegal for a manufacturer and retailer to conspire on minimum retail prices. Price decisions of this nature will now be judged on a "case by case basis" with all the free time the court system has. (Leegin Creative Leather v. PSKS Inc.)

*The court also upheld a curb on wild punitive damages when they overturned a $79+ million dollar verdict against Phillip Morris. (Interestingly the dissent on this one included Scalia, Thomas, Ginsburg and Stevens.) (Phillip Morris USA v. Williams)

*

One can only look ahead with wonder at what the first Monday in October will bring.