MetaFilter posts tagged with supremecourt and constitution

By The Content Of Their Character

Law Talkin' Guy — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 20:28:48 -0800

Today, on the last day of this year's term, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its opinion in Ricci v. DeStefano, the latest in the Court's line of decisions on Title VII and the role of race in employment decisions. The famous case centers on white firefighters' claims of race discrimination following the town of New Haven's decision to scuttle a promotion exam after white test takers performed disproportionately better than black firefighters. The case has been covered extensively in blogs and the mainstream and local media. In addition to the high-stakes questions at issue in the case itself, Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor sat on the panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that summarily decided the case at the intermediate appellate level.

Pleasant Grove City v. Summum

Non Prosequitur — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 12:16:33 -0800

The previously-mentioned Summums want to place their own monument in a park which contains the Ten Commandments, making the Supreme Court's heads explode in a a hilariously weird oral argument^[pdf]: "Scalia: I don't know what that means. You keep saying it, and I don't know what it means. [...] Breyer: Suppose that there certain messages that private people had like "eat vitamins"—and then somebody comes along with a totally different content, "ride the roller coaster," and they say this part of the park is designed to get healthy children, not put children at risk." At issue: "Pulling a crystalline, cogent rule out of the murk of the court's First Amendment, public forum, and Establishment Clause doctrine is an act of creation too complicated for mere mortals."

The Supreme Court and America’s international relations

homunculus — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 11:00:24 -0800

When Judges Make Foreign Policy. "In a globalized, post-9/11 age, decisions made by the Supreme Court are increasingly shaping America's international relations. When the next justice is appointed, our place in the world may well hang in the balance."

New Supreme Court Opinions

dios — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:15:51 -0800

A very big day for the Supreme Court. In Morse v. Fredrick, the Court ruled that a school could suspend a child for holding up a "Bong HiTs for Jesus" banner. (Previous post here). In Hein v. Freedom from Religion, the Court held that taxpayers lacked standing to challenged Faith Based Initiatives (previous discussions). In Wilke v. Robbins, the Court held that land owners do not have Bivens claims if the federal government harasses landowners for easements. In FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, the Court held that the portion of the campaign finance law which had blackout periods before elections on issue advocacy advertising was an unconstitutional restriction of speech (other). This Thursday, the Justices will deliver their last opinions of the term, including a death penalty case and the school assignment cases. (Opinions are .pdfs)

Partial-Birth Abortion Ban

homunculus — Tue, 08 May 2007 21:25:58 -0800

New Justices, New Rules: How the Supreme Court's Validation of the Federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act Affects Women's Constitutional Liberty and Equality. A two-part FindLaw analysis of Gonzales v. Carhart.

Please don’t let the cops in the house while I’m at the store.

brain_drain — Thu, 23 Mar 2006 10:00:15 -0800

Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court held in a 5-3 decision (.pdf) that police may not search a home if any inhabitant of the home is present and objects to the search, even if another inhabitant consents. The Court drew what it acknowledged is a “fine line” – if a co-inhabitant is at the door and objects, the police can’t enter; but if the co-inhabitant is somewhere else – even in a nearby police car – and has no opportunity to object, then police don’t need his or her consent. Chief Justice Roberts issued his first written dissent, blasting the majority’s “random” and “arbitrary” rule and suggesting that the ability of police to respond to domestic violence threats could be compromised. The zingers in the footnotes may reveal “strains behind the surface placidity and collegiality of the young Roberts court.”

Supreme Court declares Juvenile Death Penalty unconstitutional!

AaRdVarK — Tue, 01 Mar 2005 07:34:01 -0800

The Supreme Court just ruled in a 5-4 decision that the Juvenile Death Penalty was unconstitutional. First, it was the mentally ill, now teenagers. Are we getting close to abolishing the death penalty altogether

The state wants to watch you have sex...

eas98 — Thu, 27 Mar 2003 06:59:29 -0800

The Supreme Court is currently hearing arguments about the constitutionality of homosexual sex. While this may not be news, just listening to some of the comments by the conservatives on the court can be a chilling experience, whether you are straight or gay. Is it possible that there can be supreme court justices, supposedly the best of the best, who are really this ignorant?

darren — Wed, 14 Mar 2001 07:35:04 -0800

Is the Consitution a "living" document? Following "Scary" Scalia's arguments, the Dread Scott decision was a wise and appropriate one, right?

daveadams — Tue, 09 Jan 2001 17:10:39 -0800

Supreme Court limits federal control over "wetlands."
Ruling that not only does the Clean Water Act not support such control, but that it would be unconstitutional anyway, the court removed the Army Corps of Engineers' authority over isolated wetlands such as ponds and mudflats. [more]