Major decisions imminent as court nears end of term

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court, which is heading into the final month of its term, is expected to deliver major decisions on the future of school integration, the role of corporate money in political campaign ads and a taxpayer challenge to President Bush’s “Faith-Based Initiative.”

There probably are more 5-4 rulings and sharply worded dissents to come as the justices hand down rulings in the 26 remaining cases by the end of June and then leave for the summer.

If new Chief Justice John Roberts had something of a honeymoon last year, it came to an end earlier this year. The divide between the conservative and liberal wings was apparent in rulings on abortion and global warming. Both were decided by 5-4 votes, with conservatives winning the abortion case and the liberals carrying the global warming decision. Only Justice Anthony Kennedy was in the majority both times.

Roberts and new Justice Samuel Alito have lined up with veteran conservatives Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. They are opposed by a liberal contingent led by 87-year-old Justice John Paul Stevens and joined by Justices David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.

In the middle sits Kennedy. His vote often makes a 5-4 majority for one side or the other. In fact, in the court’s 13 rulings decided by one vote this term, Kennedy is the only justice to have been in the majority each time.

This month, the conservatives figure to prevail in three cases. Parents Involved v. Seattle will decide whether school officials may use racial guidelines to maintain integration. Parents from Seattle and Louisville, Ky., are challenging the voluntary integration policies in those cities.

Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life will decide whether groups may use corporate money to sponsor broadcast ads just before an election – which now is prohibited by the McCain-Feingold Act.

A third case, Hein v. Freedom from Religion, tests whether citizens may go to court to challenge Bush’s “Faith-Based Initiative.” Roberts and the other conservatives have suggested these claims should be thrown out because the taxpayers do not have “standing” to sue. A ruling along those lines could make it more difficult for advocates of church-state separation to go to court.

Here are some additional major cases to be decided in June:

“High schools and free speech: Do students have a right to hold up signs at school-sponsored events that carry messages that offend the principal? A case from Alaska involves a student and his banner promoting “Bong Hits 4 Jesus,” but a ruling broadly could rewrite the free-speech rules in schools across the country. (Morse v. Frederick)

“Car searches: Is a passenger legally “seized” when police pull over the driver? No, said the California Supreme Court. The ruling in favor of the passenger from northern California could be important if a passenger is charged with a crime and wants to challenge the stop as illegal. (Brendlin v. California)

“School recruiting: Do coaches have a free-speech right to contact student-athletes, or do state athletic associations have the authority to penalize high school teams for recruiting? (Tennessee Secondary Schools v. Brentwood Academy)

“Union fees: Does a teachers’ union have a right to use dues money for political purposes unless a teacher objects? (Washington v. Washington Education Association)

“Home-care workers: Are the tens of thousands of employees who provide so-called “companionship services” in the homes of the elderly and infirm entitled to minimum wages and overtime pay? (Long Island Care at Home v. Coke)

“Credit reports: When must insurers notify consumers they were charged higher rates because of a poor crediting rating? (Safeco v. Burr).