By James Vicini WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Amid a presidential race that may decide its future direction, the Supreme Court begins a new term on Monday with cases about tobacco company lawsuits, protecting whales from Navy sonar and a government crackdown on dirty words on television. The justices return to the bench for the first time since June 26, when they ended a term that produced landmark rulings on gun rights for individual Americans and for Guantanamo Bay prisoners seeking their release. The high court's docket for its new term has several interesting cases, but so far no potential blockbusters and none dealing with divisive social issues like race, gays, guns or abortion, legal experts said. They said the winner of the November 4 presidential election between Republican Sen. John McCain and Democratic Sen. Barack Obama could reshape the court through several appointments. "A President Obama or a President McCain will likely be handed an opportunity to affect the make-up of the Supreme Court that is unprecedented," said Wendy Long of the Judicial Confirmation Network, a group of conservative legal activists. Kathryn Kolbert, president of the liberal group People for the American Way, said, "The Supreme Court is on the ballot this fall, and the stakes could not be higher for Americans." McCain has praised President George W. Bush's two conservative appointees to the court -- Chief Justice John Roberts, who was named in 2005, and Justice Samuel Alito, who was appointed the following year. Obama as a U.S. senator voted against both appointees and has praised the court's four liberals -- Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer. The nine-member court has been closely divided. The conservative majority consists of Roberts, Alito, Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and the more moderate Anthony Kennedy, who often casts the decisive vote. Five of the justices are 70 or older. If Obama or McCain has the opportunity to appoint two or three justices, it could easily shift the balance of power. When the court reconvenes on Monday, the justices will hear arguments on whether tobacco companies can be sued in state courts over claims of deceptive advertising of "light" or low-tar cigarettes, a case that could affect more than 40 lawsuits around the country seeking billions of dollars. The issue in the appeal by Altria Group Inc. and its Philip Morris USA unit is whether the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act bars such lawsuits. MILITARY VERSUS THE WHALES The court on Wednesday will consider a challenge by environmentalists to the Navy's use of sonar off the southern California coast because the military training exercises could harm endangered whales and other marine mammals. Bush has intervened in the dispute, citing national security needs for the training and exempting the Navy from the environmental laws at the heart of the legal challenge. Georgetown University law professor Lisa Heinzerling said plaintiffs bringing a challenge under the National Environmental Policy Act previously have lost 15 times before the Supreme Court, without any wins. "It's the military versus the whales," she said. "It's not looking good for the plaintiffs at this point." On November 4, Election Day, the court will hear arguments about a government crackdown on dirty words on network television. It last ruled on indecency standards for broadcasters 30 years ago. The case stemmed from a Federal Communication Commission ruling in 2006 that found News Corp's Fox television network violated decency rules when singer Cher blurted out an expletive during the 2002 Billboard Music Awards broadcast and actress Nicole Richie used two during the 2003 awards. The agency said a single "fleeting" utterance of a dirty word can violate its indecency rules. (Editing by David Alexander) | 
0 comments:
Post a Comment