Supreme Court rules in firefighter bias case
Tony Mauro
In a dramatic ending before it recessed for the summer, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled, 5-4, that the city of New Haven, Conn., violated the civil rights of white and Hispanic firefighters when it tossed out the results of a promotion exam after no African-Americans had passed it. The ruling in Ricci v. DeStefano, was immediately denounced by civil rights advocates as a blow to employers, public and private, who are trying to equalize job opportunities for minorities.
Use these tools to search all U.S. Circuit and Supreme Court decisions from the past year.
Enhanced High Court Coverage
The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer and The National Law Journal have teamed up to bring you enhanced coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court.
SPONSOR SPOTLIGHT
News
Supreme Court says states can regulate national banks
Marcia Coyle
State attorneys general won a major turf war in the U.S. Supreme Court on June 29 as the justices held that states may enforce their anti-discrimination and consumer protection laws against national banks. The high court, in a 5-4 ruling, struck down a regulation issued by the chief federal regulator of national banks that pre-empted the states' power to enforce those laws.
High court losses stun environmentalists
Marcia Coyle
Environmentalists suffered a stunning 0-for-5 outcome in the U.S. Supreme Court this term, their "worst term ever," according to advocates and scholars. The defeats left the environmental community, and even its traditional antagonist in these cases — the business community — wondering where the Court is heading in this increasingly important area of the law.
Can the Voting Rights Act survive another challenge?
Tony Mauro
Now that the Supreme Court has loosened the definition of eligibility in its Voting Rights Act decision, more jurisdictions will likely seek a "bailout."
Forensic ruling adds burden for prosecutors
Tony Mauro
Both sides agree: The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts requiring that forensic evidence be presented at criminal trials by a witness who can be cross-examined will impose new burdens on prosecutors. But initial reaction was split over how big that burden will be — or whether it's a cost that just has to be borne to meet the requirements of the Sixth Amendment's confrontation clause.
Recent Decisions
Ricci v. DeStefano
U.S. Sup. Ct.
June 29, 2009
City unfairly denied white firemen promotions based on racial considerations when it discarded examination test results upon learning that very few nonwhite candidates were likely to be promoted and that lawsuits might follow (Kennedy, J.)
Cuomo v. Clearing House Association, L.L.C.
U.S. Sup. Ct.
June 29, 2009
State attorneys general can investigate national banks regarding lending practices but must first obtain court approval before issuing subpoenas (Scalia, J.)
Horne v. Flores
U.S. Sup. Ct.
June 25, 2009
Lower courts failed to conduct proper analysis in determining that Arizona failed to meet federal statutory requirements for providing equal educational opportunities to nonnative English speakers (Alito, J.)
Courtside
The replacement rush
Tony Mauro
The infrastructure of the U.S. Supreme Court confirmation industry went up almost overnight after Justice David Souter's May 1 announcement that he plans to retire in late June. It's all happening at cyberspeed, and by the end of this week at least the suspense may be over. While we wait, here is a collection of items dealing with the fallout from Souter's announcement.
Commentary
Who's an activist?
Edward E. Kaufman
The term activist is generally nothing more than politically charged shorthand for decisions with which the accuser disagrees. Let's abandon the term altogether, recognizing it for what it has become in the confirmation process — just a tired part of an old script.
The 'Latina woman' comment
Douglas W. Kmiec
The "Latina woman" comment has thus far framed the opposition to the confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor. If that's all the opposition has, Sotomayor will be the 111th justice of the United States. Was it right then for the president to opine that the judge, if she had a do-over, would in fact "restate" the now famous remark?
Only a partial win
Amanda Frost
In its recent decision in Caperton v. Massey, the U.S. Supreme Court declared that an elected state court judge must recuse himself from a case involving his largest campaign donor. The decision is a victory for common sense and fundamental fairness. Unfortunately, however, it cannot help the real losers in the 39 states that elect rather than appoint judges — those accused of crimes who rely on judges to protect their rights.
Sweep of recusal ruling unclear
Tony Mauro
The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Caperton v. Massey Coal Company has already been given a range of interpretations by commentators. By a 5-4 vote, the Court said the constitutional right to due process can sometimes require an elected judge to recuse in a case involving a campaign benefactor. To sort out the meaning and implications of the Caperton ruling, Tony Mauro spoke with former Texas Chief Justice Thomas Phillips.
Silly linguistic games
Christopher J. Peters
"Judicial activism." "Legislating from the bench." Let's drop the name-calling and recognize that judges do make law and that their personal preferences play a role.
