NPR Coverage of the 2004

NPR Coverage of the 2005 (-06) Term
of the US Supreme Court
updated 29 October 2006

Recap of 2005 Term

For the first time in 11 years, the Supreme Court had a new membership, a new ideological makeup, and a new chief justice. The court wrapped up its current term with a bang, issuing a historic decision on presidential power by striking down military tribunals for detainees at Guantanamo Bay.
With the departure of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and the arrivals of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, the court shifted to the right, as expected.
It would have moved far more dramatically to the right had it not been for the court's new swing justice, Anthony Kennedy. It's a role Kennedy has played in the past. But he's been more reliably conservative than O'Connor, and less likely to defect to the more liberal bloc of justices. Morning Edition, July 4, 2006.

Yet More Gitmo
The Supreme Court has ruled that President Bush overstepped his authority in the design of war crimes trials for some Guantanamo detainees. The court ruled 5-3 that the president did not have the authority to take the "extraordinary measure" of developing trials that severely limited the rights of the accused. Morning Edition, June 30, 2006.

More Gitmo

President Bush overstepped his authority in the design of war crimes trials of Guantanamo detainees, according to a Supreme Court ruling. The Bush administration argued that the president has the power to make that decision on his own. The court ruled 5-3 that the president did not have the authority to take the "extraordinary measure" of developing trials that severely limited the rights of the accused. But the court's decision leaves open the possibility that the nation's laws could be changed to allow the trials to continue. All Things Considered, June 29, 2006.

Gitmo Tribunal Policy Struck Down
The Supreme Court rules against President Bush on his administration's handling of war crimes trials for Guantanamo Bay detainees. The ruling says the proposed trials for Guantanomo detainees were illegal under U.S. law and international Geneva conventions. Morning Edition, June 29, 2006.

More on Texas Redistricting
The Supreme Court has issued a major decision on legislative re-apportionment. Based on a Texas case, the court ruled that state legislatures may redraw congressional district lines when they see fit. Traditionally, legislatures have reworked districts every 10 years with the census. The ruling may set off a wave of attempts to redraw districts across the U.S. Nina Totenberg reports. Morning Edition, June 29, 2006.

Texas Redistricting Splits the Baby... and the Court
The Supreme Court upholds most of the changes made in Texas's congressional districts, which were redrawn at the urging of former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. But the justices ruled that in one district, the map failed to protect minority rights, saying that it violates the Voting Rights Act. All Things Considered, June 28, 2006.

More on Vermont Campaign Finance Case
The Supreme Court rejected a Vermont law Monday that sets strict limits on money in political campaigns. The ruling came as a relief to many people in politics. It maintains the standards that have governed campaign finance for the past 30 years. Morning Edition, June 27, 2006.

Court Upholds Kansas Death Instructions
Supreme Court justices sparred over the fairness of capital punishment Monday as they wrapped up their last death penalty case of the term. It was a surprisingly spirited conclusion to a case from Kansas that had gotten little attention. Nina Totenberg reports. Morning Edition, June 27, 2006.

What is Left: Redistricting and Guantanamo
The U.S. Supreme Court has yet to rule on a handful of cases in its current session. One of the cases is the so-called "Hamdan case," which could determine the future of detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Also pending is a decision on redistricting in Texas. Michele Norris talks with NPR's Nina Totenberg. All Things Considered, June 26, 2006.

Court Strikes Down Vermont Campaign Contribution Law
A divided Supreme Court throws out Vermont's limits on campaign contributions, ruling that the law constitutes a restraint of free speech, in violation of the First Amendment. Vermont's limits on campaign spending and fundraising are the lowest in the nation. All Things Considered, June 26, 2006.

More on "Knock and Announce" and the Exclusionary Rule
After a bitter debate, the Supreme Court issues a 5-4 ruling that protects evidence gathered by more aggressive police-search techniques. Justices split over a case where police -- armed with a warrant -- paused only briefly before entering a home. Morning Edition, June 16, 2006.

No Exclusionary Rule for a Violation of the "Knock and Announce" Rule
The Supreme Court rules that police in Michigan can use the evidence they gathered in a search warrant at a home, even though they waited only a few seconds after announcing their presence before entering the house. In the past, the justices have wanted police to wait longer. All Things Considered, June 15, 2006

Critics say that since police need not wait more than a few seconds, they are essentially freed from giving any notice before carrying out the search, at least under the federal constitution. The change was made possible by the votes of the two new justices.

More on Death Penalty Decisions: Determining Guilty; Nature of Punishment
In a unanimous ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court paves the way for challenges to the use of lethal injection in death penalty cases. The court also expanded the rights of inmates to challenge convictions in federal court based on DNA evidence. Morning Edition, June 13, 2006

Death Penalty: Determining Guilty; Nature of Punishment
The Supreme Court rules that death-row inmates may challenge lethal injection as an unnecessarily cruel -- and thus unconstitutional -- punishment. The unanimous decision came on the same day the court expanded inmates' ability to challenge their convictions in federal court based on new DNA evidence. All Things Considered, June 12, 2006.

Court to Hear Case on Use of Race to "Balance" Public Schools
The U.S. Supreme Court reenters the battle over affirmative action, announcing that it will decide whether public schools may use race as a factor in making students assignments in order to promote racial diversity. All Things Considered, June 5, 2006.

Whistle-Blowing Not Protected by First Amendment
A new Supreme Court ruling could make it much more difficult for public employees to bring retaliation claims against their bosses for critical reports they make through the chain of command. By a 5-to-4 vote, the court ruled that public employees have no First Amendment right to make internal reports that their bosses don't like. All Things Considered, May 30, 2006.

Roberts' Court Produces More Unanimous Decision
Many decisions coming out of the Supreme Court this term have been unanimous. At first glance, that might make the court look unified under new Chief Justice John Roberts. The unity, however, appears to have been achieved by narrowing the scope of the rulings. Morning Edition, May 22, 2006.

ANNA WINS!!!! (for now)

The Supreme Court rules that one-time stripper and Playboy Playmate Anna Nicole Smith can pursue part of her late husband's oil fortune. Justices unanimously gave new legal life to Smith's bid to collect millions of dollars from the estate of J. Howard Marshall II.

Smith married Marshall, an oil tycoon, in 1994 -- she was 26, he was 89. His estate has been estimated to be worth as much as $1.6 billion. Marshall says he'll continue a court battle for his father's entire estate. All Things Considered, May 1, 2006

Oral Arguments in the Lethal Injection Case

The Supreme Court hears arguments on what condemned inmates can do to challenge their method of execution. The Florida case centers on whether an inmate should get a federal court hearing on his claim that the lethal-injection method causes unnecessary pain.

Inmate Clarence Hill was convicted of killing a police officer. In January, Hill's execution was stayed by the Supreme Court as he lay strapped to a gurney in Florida's death chamber.

Thirty years ago, death by lethal injection was conceived of as a more humane way to execute the condemned -- 37 states now use the method. But the lethal cocktail that is administered has not changed, and critics charge that unnecessary suffering is caused by both the cocktail and the lack of training for those who administer it.

Another issue is that the anesthesia that is first administered is short-term, critics say. Death-penalty lawyer Ted Doss, speaking outside the Supreme Court, said that the paralytic administered after the anesthesia prevents the condemned man from indicating if he is still conscious and feeling. All Things Considered, April 26, 2006

The Tools of Lethal Injection
The Supreme Court hears arguments in a case about challenges to the use of lethal injection. It could give inmates new authority to challenge the execution method. Morning Edition, April 26, 2006

Arguments in Warrantless Entry Case

The Supreme Court hears arguments in a case about police entering a home without a warrant. Police in a Utah community looked through a window, and saw adults trying to restrain a young man, who then punched one of the adults.

The police entered the home without a warrant, and the occupants were charged with misdemeanors. Lower courts, deeming the entry unconstitutional, have ruled that evidence from the scene can not be used in court. All Things Considered, April 24, 2006

Warrantless Police Entry Case
A court case that began with a simple complaint from a neighbor about a loud party has now landed in the Supreme Court. The justices will hear arguments that examine when, and for what reasons, police are authorized to enter a home. Morning Edition, April 24, 2006

Oral Arguments in the Insanity Defense Case

The Supreme Court hears arguments in an Arizona case about the use of the insanity defense in the case of a delusional man convicted of killing a police officer. The state says the accused can discern right from wrong. His family wants him found guilty by reason of insanity. As proof, they cite his contention that 50,000 aliens live in the city of Flagstaff. All Things Considered, April 19, 2006

Insanity Defenses and the Due Process Clause
The Supreme Court reviews Clark v. Arizona, a new test of the insanity defense. The parents of an Arizona man who killed a police officer want their son declared guilty but insane. The state does not want his mental state considered in court. Morning Edition, April 19, 2006

Oral Arguments in Workplace Retaliation Case
The Supreme Court hears arguments related to employees being punished after making discrimination complaints. The case of a worker suspended without pay for more than a month could define the circumstances under which an employee who charges discrimination can also sue for retaliation. All Things Considered, April 17, 2006

Employer Retaliation Case
The Supreme Court hears a case attempting to define what constitutes retaliation by an employer against an employee who has filed a discrimination suit against their company. Morning Edition, April 17, 2006

More on the Orals from Hamdan

U.S. Supreme Court justices sharply question the legal basis for the military tribunals set up by President Bush in the war on terrorism. The White House contends that detainees must first submit to military commissions, and then may appeal to civilian courts. Morning Edition, March 29, 2006

The entire oral argument is here.

Oral Arguments in Hamdan

The Supreme Court hears arguments about whether President Bush has the sole power to establish military tribunals to try Guantanamo prisoners for war crimes. The administration says the detainees have to submit first to commissions run by the military, and only when that is done can they appeal to civilian courts. All Things Considered, March 28, 2006

Excerpts from oral argument here.

The Court to Hear Hamdan
The U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments in a case that challenges President Bush's power to set up military tribunals for suspected terrorists. The case centers on Osama bin Laden's former driver, who says he is an innocent father who worked for bin Laden only to make a living. The Bush administration says he is a trained terrorist who should be tried before a special tribunal. Morning Edition, March 28, 2006

Court Rejects Spousal Consent to Search
In a 5-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court rules that police without a warrant cannot search a home when the residents disagree about whether the police can enter. Chief Justice John Roberts was among the dissenters, saying the ruling could have severe consequences on domestic violence cases. All Things Considered, March 22, 2006

Yale Law and the Military
The Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that colleges must accept military recruiters on campus, if the schools want to continue receiving federal funds. Some schools had objected to the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gays. The schools claimed that, as a matter of free speech, they should not have to associate with military recruiters. Morning Edition, March 7, 2006

Oral Arguments... Justice DeLay(ed)?
The U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments on congressional redistricting. At issue is the 2003 Texas redistricting plan orchestrated by former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. That plan resulted in Republicans picking up six seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. All Things Considered, March 1, 2006

Texas Reapportionment Case
The U.S. Supreme Court hears a case that could have a major impact on elections and the balance of power in Congress. Up for debate is the constitutionality of a political boundary map promoted by former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX). Morning Edition, March 1, 2006

Anna's Day ... the Justices Seem to Like What They Hear from Her
The Supreme Court justices seem sympathetic to actress Anna Nicole Smith as they hear arguments in her case to claim part of her late billionaire husband's estate. The question is whether federal courts have a role in probate issues, which traditionally are in the control of the states. All Things Considered, February 28, 2006

Campaign Finance Comes Before the Bush Court
The Supreme Court considers a challenge to a Vermont law that would overturn three decades of federal campaign finance law. Current precedent limits the amount of money individual donors can give candidates, but not the amount candidates can spend in a campaign. Vermont wants to set spending limits on gubernatorial candidates. Morning Edition, February 28, 2006

Anna Nicole Smith Appeals to Different Old Men (and One Woman)
The Supreme Court hears a case involving celebrity Anna Nicole Smith and millions of dollars. She is attempting to establish her claim to part of her late husband's estate. Morning Edition, February 28, 2006

Anna, arriving at the Supreme Court, 28 February 2006

Abortion Returns... this Time to the "Bush Court"
The Supreme Court votes to review a case stemming from the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. The federal law has been struck down by judges in three states. Those states say that the act doesn't make an exception for using the technique to save the health of the mother. All Things Considered, February 21, 2006

Oral Arguments in the Clean Water Case
The Supreme Court hears arguments about a challenge to the Clean Water Act. The case involves a developer who refuses to apply for a permit to build on wetland-designated property. He says the federal act should not apply to the land, which is 20 miles from Lake Huron. All Things Considered, February 21, 2006

The "Bush Court," Sitting for the First Time, Takes Up the Clean Water Act
The Supreme Court hears arguments on Tuesday in two cases that could dramatically limit the reach of the Clean Water Act. The law has been credited with preserving the nation's waterways. But some landowners and developers say the regulations are too restrictive. Morning Edition, February 21, 2006

The Court Punts the New Hampshire Abortion Case
The Supreme Court, ruling in its first abortion case since 2000, reiterates that restrictions on abortion are unconstitutional if they do not provide for an exception to protect the woman's health. But it sends the case, which involves involves New Hampshire's parental-notification requirement for minors, back to the lower courts and steers clear of any major new pronouncements in its unanimous decision. All Things Considered, January 18, 2006

More on Oregon Decision
By a 6-to-3 vote the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld an Oregon law that allows doctors to prescribe lethal doses of narcotics to terminally ill patients who want to end their lives. The physician-assisted suicide law is the only one in the country. Morning Edition, January 18, 2006

Justices Uphold Oregon Assisted Suicide Law
The Supreme Court rules in favor of Oregon's physician-assisted-suicide law in a 6-to-3 decision. The justices find the state has the right to allow doctors to prescribe lethal doses of drugs for terminally ill, mentally sound patients. The court also finds that the Bush administration, through the actions of the U.S. attorney general, had in effect criminalized the practice without the authorization of Congress. All Things Considered, January 17, 2006 ·

More on the DNA Case, House v. Bell
The Supreme Court hears an appeal from death row inmate Paul Bell, who wants his conviction reversed. It's the first time the high court has agreed to look at a post-conviction appeal based on DNA evidence. Day to Day, January 11, 2006

DNA Testing and the Death Penalty

The Supreme Court hears arguments Wednesday in a case that marks the first time a death row inmate has brought DNA evidence before the high court to prove his innocence. The outcome could determine whether prisoners have a constitutional right to use DNA technology to seek new trials. Morning Edition, January 11, 2006

Abortion, the Public, and the Court
Josh Rogers of New Hampshire Public Radio reports on public opinion about abortion in New Hampshire. The abortion case currently before the Supreme Court concerns a New Hampshire law. When a minor wants to have an abortion, the law requires that the provider notify one of her parents at least 48 hours beforehand. There is support for abortion rights in New Hampshire -- but also for notification laws like this. All Things Considered, January 4, 2006

Then, Jeffrey Rosen of the George Washington University law school discusses other abortion cases that might come before the Supreme Court in the future.

Texas Reapportionment: Political Thicket or "What a Tangled Web We Weave..."?
The Supreme Court has agreed to review the constitutionality of a map for Texas congressional districts that opponents say was improperly manipulated. The map, engineered by Rep. Tom Delay (R-TX), helped Republicans increase their hold on the Texas delegation. Things Considered, December 12, 2005

Orals In Yale Law v. The Military
The Supreme Court hears arguments on some law schools' objections to military recruiters on campus. The schools are asking the court to overturn a law that withdraws federal funds if the schools don't allow the military the same access and help that it gives other employers who recruit on campus. All Things Considered, December 6, 2005

Yale Law v. The Military
The Supreme Court hears arguments Tuesday on whether the federal government may order law schools to give military recruiters the same access as other prospective employers. Currently, federal funds can be withdrawn from an entire university if one of its schools bans military recruiters. Morning Edition, December 6, 2005

Orals in the Parental Consent Case
The U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments Wednesday on a New Hampshire law requiring parents be notified when a minor seeks an abortion. Advocates of the law say parents know best for their child, but a federal appeals court struck down the law because it did not include an exception for a medical emergency in which the health of the minor was in danger. Nina Totenberg reports. All Things Considered, November 30, 2005

The Roberts Court Takes Up Abortion
The Supreme Court hears arguments Wednesday on a New Hampshire law requiring minors to notify their parents before getting an abortion. A federal appeals court ruled against the law, saying it should carry an exemption for a minor whose health is at stake. Morning Edition, November 30, 2005

Special Education: Students, Parents, Schools, and the Burden of Proof
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that parents who demand better special education programs for their children have the burden of proof in the challenges -- which means that when parents challenge a program, they have the burden in an administrative hearing of showing that the program is insufficient. All Things Considered, November 14, 2005

ADA and State Prisons -- oral arguments
The Supreme Court is hearing a case on whether the Americans with Disabilities Act requires state prisons to make accodmodations for disabled prisoners. The court has issued mixed rulings in recent years on whether the federal law infringes on the rights of states. All Things Considered, November 9, 2005

ADA and States... This Time Prisons
The Supreme Court hears arguments Wednesday in an important test of the Americans with Disabilities Act. At issue is whether a prisoner who uses a wheelchair has the constitutional right to sue the state of Georgia for failing to reasonably accommodate his disability. Morning Edition, November 9, 2005

Cert grant in the Hamdan Case
The Supreme Court agrees to consider a challenge to the military tribunals the Bush administration has used to try suspected terrorists. One of the detainees includes a man captured in Afghanistan in 2001 and accused of being the driver for al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. All Things Considered, November 7, 2005

Oral Arguments in the Oregon Case
The Supreme Court hears arguments on an Oregon state law allowing physician-assisted suicide. The high court will decide whether the Justice Department has the authority to override state laws regulating the prescription of drugs and the practices of doctors. All Things Considered, October 5, 2005

Oregon and the Feds Tussle Over Drugs for Death
The Supreme Court hears arguments Wednesday on a challenge to the only state law in the country that authorizes doctor-assisted suicide for terminally ill patients. The law allows doctors to prescribe lethal doses of drugs. Morning Edition, October 5, 2005.

Roberts and the Court Begin 2005 Term as a Sideshow to the Miers Nomination
The announcement of Harriet Miers' nomination to the Supreme Court comes on the day the court opens a new term ... with a new justice in the center seat. John Roberts -- the 17th chief justice of the United States -- is presiding over a court in transition, dealing with tumultuous cases. Morning Edition, October 3, 2005

Overview of the 2005 Term
As Chief Justice John Roberts arrives and a new high court session begins, the court's docket includes cases involving restrictions on access to abortions, federal vs. state drug laws and campaign finance. Legal analyst Mimi Wesson of the University of Colorado runs down the agenda for Liane Hansen. Weekend Edition - Sunday, October 2, 2005.

(return to Supreme Court news page)