High Court Limits Whistleblower Lawsuits - Forbes.com

~~~ This ruling disappoints me.
A close loss at 5-4 too.

Last year it could been 5-4 the other way.
( Or even 6-3 -- as Rehnquist was a bit of a maverick on free speech ) .

Welcome to the Roberts & Alito court . ~~~ tp

===================

High Court Limits Whistleblower Lawsuits - Forbes.com: "
Associated Press
"High Court Limits Whistleblower Lawsuits"
By GINA HOLLAND , 05.30.2006, 11:12 AM

"The Supreme Court on Tuesday made it harder for government employees to file lawsuits claiming they were retaliated against for going public with allegations of official misconduct.

By a 5-4 vote, justices said the nation's 20 million public employees do not have carte blanche free speech rights to disclose government's inner-workings. New Justice Samuel Alito cast the tie-breaking vote"

: Supreme Court Developments on Yahoo! News

Print Story: Supreme Court Developments on Yahoo! News: -- Yahoo! News

Supreme Court Developments
By The Associated PressMon May 22, 4:24 PM ET

Highlights of actions taken Monday by the Supreme Court. The justices:

_Ruled unanimously that police do not need a warrant to go into a home to break up a bloody fight, in a case involving a 'melee' that Brigham City, Utah, police officers saw through a window.

_Rejected an appeal from Tennessee death row inmate Abu-Ali Abdur'Rahman, who wanted the court to declare that the drug protocol used in most executions amounts to cruel punishment.

_Refused to hear an appeal in the case of a mentally ill man, Andrew Goldstein, whose conviction was overturned in the death of a woman pushed into the path of a subway train in New York.

_Said they would not consider the case of convicted murderer James Hamm, who graduated from law school and is being thwarted in his efforts to become a practicing attorney in Arizona.

_Delayed a decision on whether to take up a fight over reporters' confidential sources, apparently because a former government scientist's lawsuit that prompted journalist subpoenas may be settled.

_Declined for the second time to get involved in a child custody fight between a San Diego woman and and her former [female] partner."

============

Court: Hallucinogenic tea OK

~ A major win here for religious civil liberties. And an 8-0 shutout too. I find this to be a "Liberal" ruling, as it is allowing something the Federal Government wanted to ban. Not bad for a "Conservative" court. ~~~ TP

---------
Court: Hallucinogenic tea OK: "WASHINGTON, DC, United States (UPI) -- The U.S. Supreme Court Tuesday rejected government arguments against use of a hallucinogenic tea in religious services.

The 8-0 ruling written by Chief Justice John Roberts stemmed from a New Mexico case involving O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao Do Vegetal, a Spiritst Christian sect originating in the Amazon Rainforest. The court`s newest justice, Sam Alito, did not take part in the case."

http://news.monstersandcritics.com/

Alito Often Ruled for Religious Expression - N Y Times

Alito Often Ruled for Religious Expression - New York Times: "Nathan J. Diament, the public affairs director for the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations, said Judge Alito's record demonstrated 'a deep understanding' of the Free Exercise Clause. Mr. Diament mentioned Judge Alito's concurrence in a ruling allowing a Jewish teacher at William Paterson College in New Jersey to go forward with a lawsuit accusing the school administration of trying to force her out by scheduling events on Friday evenings. 'He didn't just agree that the suit should go forward,' Mr. Diament said. 'He went out of his way to express his philosophy on the need to accommodate religious individuals.'"

November 8, 2005

Justices Back Paying Workers as They Suit Up

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 1:53 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that companies must pay plant workers for the time it takes to change into protective clothing and safety gear and walk to their work stations.

The issue was one of two that justices settled in a pair of unanimous decisions, the first rulings under the leadership of Chief Justice John Roberts in the new fall term. Roberts did not write either one.

In a defeat for business, the court said that employers must pay wages for the donning of ''integral'' gear and the time it takes workers to then walk to the production area.

The court, in a ruling by Justice John Paul Stevens, upheld a decision of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in favor of workers at a meat processing plant in Pasco, Wash. Those workers typically put on sanitary outer garments, boots, hardhats, aprons and gloves.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Scotus-Protective-Gear.html?hp&ex=1131512400&en=31fdf239ce7f8501&ei=5094&partner=homepage

CBS News | He Said/She Said Over Home Search | November 7, 2005 14:00:09

CBS News | He Said/She Said Over Home Search | November 7, 2005 14:00:09: "the U.S. Supreme Court is about to examine whether the police need the consent of one or both spouses to conduct a warrantless search of a home"

ABC News: Should Drug Laws Limit Religious Activities?

~~ I am a complete Libertarian on drug laws.

I hope the court rules for my side , of course .

Go Team !!! ~~ TP
--------------------------------------------

ABC News: Should Drug Laws Limit Religious Activities?: "The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last year that the group could continue to drink hoasca. Now the issue has reached the Supreme Court in a case that is seen as a test of religious freedom in America.

The court will decide in Gonzales v. Centro Espirita Beneficente União do Vegetal whether the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 requires the government to allow the church to continue to import and drink the tea."

.: Legal Challenge To Subway Bag Searches 1010 WINS -

~~~ This is an important case.

The Losing side will appeal.

I expect the Supreme Court with get

the final say here.

This is also a tough case. The balance

between security , random searches,

and privacy is a tight legal knot of

Constitutional Rights

vs.

Communal Sercurity. ~`

~ TP

: Legal Challenge To Subway Bag Searches: "Nov 1, 2005 6:14 am US/Eastern
(1010 WINS) (NEW YORK)" In a perfect world, all the people who enter the subways would have their possessions searched in an effort to prevent terrorism, a police official testified Monday at the start of a civil liberties trial."

: Supreme Court: NYC Commuter Tax

``New York has the right to tax 100 percent of a nonresident employee's income derived from New York sources,'' according to the 4-3 decision by the Court of Appeals of New York, which acknowledged the decision could discourage telecommuting.

1010 WINS - ALL NEWS. ALL THE TIME. | 1010wins.com

Supreme Court: No NYC Commuter Tax

Nov 1, 2005 7:07 am US/Eastern

News from PC Magazine: US High Court Won't Hear Wireless Radiation Appeal

~~~ Interesting bit of news here.

But will the courts & lawyers resolve this BEFORE
our cell phones kill us ??

Be smart , use a headset whenever possible. ~~ ` `TP

WASHINGTON (Reuters)—Class-action lawsuits against wireless telephone companies over radiation emissions will be able to go forward, after the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear an appeal by the companies."

News from PC Magazine: US High Court Won't Hear Wireless Radiation Appeal:
====================================================

"Killed by Contempt "- By PAUL KRUGMAN

~~Katrina will seal Bush's fate in history as fluke
President. A simple minded President's son and Senator's grandson , who was in above his head from the moment the Supreme Court elected him `

In the wake of G.W. Bush's tenure , there is a failing war that 100% his baby, and now maybe as many as 10,000 dead Americans who died for no cause under his -- lack of action -- command. ~~
~
~ TP

===============

By PAUL KRUGMAN

Published: September 5, 2005

"Killed by Contempt "

"Each day since Katrina brings more evidence of the lethal ineptitude of federal officials. I'm not letting state and local officials off the hook, but federal officials had access to resources that could have made all the difference, but were never mobilized."

"Here's one of many examples: The Chicago Tribune reports that the U.S.S. Bataan, equipped with six operating rooms, hundreds of hospital beds and the ability to produce 100,000 gallons of fresh water a day, has been sitting off the Gulf Coast since last Monday - without patients."

"Several recent news analyses on FEMAs sorry state have attributed the agency's decline to its inclusion in the Department of Homeland Security, whose prime concern is terrorism, not natural disasters...."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/05/opinion/05krugman.html?ex=1126065600&en=f89efac00ecce23e&ei=5070

firstamendmentcenter.org: Rehnquist & First Amendment: end of an era analysis

~ ~ ` Justice Rehnquist is one of the more interesting ChiefJustices in American history. Both in character & intellect.

Rehnquist had the paradoxical effect of increasing the Federalist power of the Supreme Court by often overturning Congressional legislation....

.. while at the same time issuing other decsions that greatly decreased the Federal reach over states rights.

This article here is a nice overview of
Justice Rehnquist's legal legacy . ~~ TP

--------------

"Rehnquist & First Amendment: end of an era"

By Ronald K.L. Collins

First Amendment Center scholar
09.04.05
firstamendmentcenter.org: analysis:

"Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist's death ends a

judicial career that has left its mark on our

constitutional law of freedom of expression and

religious liberty.

The Rehnquist II Court (the Court as currently

constituted)has been sharing courtroom and chambers

since the fall term of 1994.

Since then, the Court has handed down 58 First

Amendment freedom-of-expression opinions in

matters involving religious speech, association rights,

Internet regulation, government-employee expression,

indecent speech, commercial expression,

telemarketing, prisoners’ speech, campaign-finance

laws, hate speech, and various kinds of zoning laws

affecting free speech, among others."

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/analysis.aspx?id=15526

===============================================

"Rehnquist's Death Puts Stevens in Charge" By ANNE GEARAN , Associated Press Writer

~~~ Justice Stevens is my favorite Justice.

He is 85 and now in charge.

Click HERE to see an earlier--- and now important--- article on a

recent spreech he gave.

~ ~ ~TP

"Rehnquist's Death Puts Stevens in Charge"

By ANNE GEARAN , Associated Press Writer

1010wins.com

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The death of Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist leaves the court's oldest member, 85-year-old liberal Justice John Paul Stevens, temporarily in charge.

Stevens, although chosen for the court by a Republican president, has emerged as the court's most liberal member.

Stevens, although chosen for the court by a Republican president, has emerged as the court's most liberal member.

That is due more to the court's gradual shift rightward under the leadership of the conservative Rehnquist than to changes in Stevens' own philosophy.

Small, acerbic and dapper in a bow tie, Stevens has a quiet and genial manner on and off the bench.

He is less likely to badger lawyers who argue before the court than some of his colleagues, and often says little during oral arguments.

He speaks in public infrequently, and is not the constant presence at arts performances or charity functions frequented by some of his colleagues.

He lives part-time in Florida, and spends his off-hours playing competitive duplicate bridge and tennis.

© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.

BBC NEWS | Technology | Q&A: File-sharing ruling

BBC NEWS | Technology | Q&A: File-sharing ruling: "Q&A: File-sharing ruling
The US Supreme Court has dealt the company behind the Grokster file-sharing network a heavy blow
The US Supreme Court has ruled against file-sharing firms
In a shock decision the US Supreme Court has ruled that the firms behind file-sharing networks must answer for what people do on these systems. Here we take a look at the decision and the implications it has for the future.

What did the court decide?"

Justice Weighs Desire v. Duty (Duty Prevails) - New York Times

~~~
Justice Stevens calling decsions he voted for unwise.

But the blame lies with congress, he says ,, as they write the dumb laws. { I am paraphasing him there .]

In the annals of Supreme Court History , this is a major speech -- that is sure to be cited often in Law Schools & civil liberties classes . ~
~` TP

August 25, 2005
"Justice Weighs Desire v. Duty (Duty Prevails)"
By LINDA GREENHOUSE, N.Y. Times ;

WASHINGTON, Aug. 24 - It is not every day that a Supreme Court justice calls his own decisions unwise. But with unusual candor, Justice John Paul Stevens did that last week in a speech in which he explored the gap that sometimes lies between a judge's desire and duty.

Addressing a bar association meeting in Las Vegas, Justice Stevens dissected several of the recent term's decisions, including his own majority opinions in two of the term's most prominent cases. The outcomes were 'unwise,' he said, but 'in each I was convinced that the law compelled a result that I would have opposed if I were a legislator.'

In one, the eminent domain case that became the term's most controversial decision, he said that his majority opinion that upheld the government's 'taking' of private homes for a commercial development in New London, Conn., brought about a result 'entirely divorced from my judgment concerning the wisdom of the program' that was under constitutional attack.

His own view, Justice Stevens told the Clark County Bar Association, was that 'the free play of market forces is more likely to produce acceptable results in the long run than the best-intentioned plans of public officials.' But he sa"

A Federal Court Rules that the First Amendment to the US constitution, means that no authority can restrict the flow of ANY information to any citizen

~~ A Federal Court Rules that the First Amendment to the US constitution, means that no authority can restrict the flow of ANY information to any citizen, even if that citizen be in jail. I think that is very good. ~~ tp

Guess Who WANTS Junk Mail?
Wed Feb 2, 2005 10:08 AM ET

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Some Americans might think of junk mail as cruel and unusual punishment, but a U.S. appeals court ruled on Tuesday that prison officials may not stop bulk mail and catalogs from reaching prisoners.

The case stems from a lawsuit against Washington state's Department of Corrections, which had barred its inmates from receiving such mailed materials.

The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court ruling and rejected arguments that banning bulk mail makes it easier to run a prison and reduces the risk of fire.

"Publishers have a First Amendment right to communicate with prisoners by mail, and inmates have a First Amendment right to receive this mail," Arthur Alarcon wrote for the three-judge panel.

The "ban on non-subscription bulk mail and catalogs is not rationally related to a legitimate penological interest and is therefore unconstitutional," he added.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++