No new grants
on Mar 20, 2006 at 10:01 am
The Supreme Court released its orders on Monday morning; no new cases were granted review.
The Court also took no action on the pending war-on-terrorism appeal by Jose Padilla. The Court’s electronic docket shows that the case of Padilla v . Hanft (05-533) will be considered again at the private Conference on Friday; this will mark the seventh time the case has been examined. Padilla, a U.S. citizen, was designated an “enemy combatant” after his arrest on returning to the U.S. from abroad. He spent more than three years in a Navy brig before the federal government obtained criminal charges against him, and transferred him to civilian custody.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., once again made clear that he is taking no part in any action of the Court on another war-on-terrorism case, the constitutional challenge to the U.S. “military commissions” set up to try war crimes charges against detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Roberts took no part in an order refusing to allow the filing of a late brief by eight Guantanamo prisoners who say they have been found subject to potential commission charges, but have not yet actually been charged. Their lawyer sought to enter the case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (05-184) to discuss the scope of Congress’ new Detainee Treatment Act and its application to pending terrorism lawsuits.
Among cases denied review on Monday, the Court declined to hear cross appeals on a significant California smoker’s lawsuit, leaving intact a state court ruling that appears to allow smokers to seek damages on the theory that they were harmed by cigarettes that had design flaws because they failed to meet consumer expectations about safety. The petitions were Philip Morris USA v. Boeken (05-594) and Boeken v. Philip Morris USA (05-600).
The Court invited the U.S. solicitor general to provide the federal government’s views on how administrators of benefit plans covered by ERISA are to determine the validity of a waiver of benefits under such plans. The case is McGowan v. NJR Service Corp., et al. (05-853), involving a ruling by the Third Circuit Court on the waiver of benefits by a former wife of a plan participant.. (Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., did not take part in the Court’s order inviting the SG to file a brief; he was on the Third Circuit when en banc review was denied; he was not on the Circuit Court panel.)
The Court summarily upheld a ruling by a three-judge U.S. District Court on New York. The lower court rejected a constitutional challenge to a federal law, the Communications Decency Act of 1996, that bars distribution of obscene materials via the Internet. The law was challenged as sweeping too broadly and as vague by Barbara Nitke, an art photographer who specliazes in photos of adults engaging in sexual activity, and by the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom. Nitke sought to post some of her work on her website. The case was Nitke v . Gonzales (05-526). (When the Court decides a case summarily, it may or may not issue an opinion; there was no opinion in this case.)
