Good afternoon . .
With only a few short weeks left in the 9-month term of the Supreme Court, justices are beginning to issue decisions on important cases.
The Supreme Court ruled federal authorities may prosecute individuals who use or are prescribed by doctors "medical" marijuana.
In a 6-2 decision the justices concluded that state laws do not protect users from the federal ban on the substance.
This is a setback for advocates of medical marijuana who have convinced 10 states to allow the use of the drug to ease the pain of certain patients.
The court said that prosecution of pot users under the federal Controlled Substance Act was constitutional.
Writing for the majority Justice John Paul Stevens said that it was up to the Congress to change the law to allow for the medical use of marijuana.
Writing a dissent, Justice Sandra Day O'Conner said that the states should be able to make their own rules.
Diane Monson, one of the women in the case said she will defy the court's ruling. "I'm going to have to be prepared to be arrested," she said.
US Supreme Court outlaws "medical marijuana" - Yahoo! News
--
In a ruling today the Supreme Court expanded the reach of the Americans With Disabilities Act.
In a 6-3 decision the justices ruled that foreign cruise lines must provide better access to passengers in wheelchairs and with other disabilities.
"The statute is applicable to foreign ships in the United States waters to the same extent that it is applicable to American ships in those waters," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the majority.
While siding with the majority on the reach of the ADA, Justice Clarence Thomas took part in the dissent by saying that actual modifications under the statute did not extend to changes to the ship's "physical structure."
The case is Spector v. Norwegian Cruise Line, 03-1388
Court: Ships Must Provide Disabled Access - Yahoo! News
--
In addition to these rulings, the Supreme Court also decided not to hear arguments in two cases.
The court refused to reinstate a lawsuit that accuses federal officials of discriminating against male athletes in enforcing equal opportunities for female athletes under Title IX.
At issue was whether the court would hear a challenge that the law directly caused a reduction in men's sports. The appeal from the National Wrestling Coaches Association was rejected without comment.
The case is National Wrestling Coaches Association v. Department of Education, 04-922
The court also refused to hear arguments to determine whether an article in a weekly newspaper about a 6-year old girl getting arrested over a book report libeled two public officials.
The case is Isaacks v. New Times, 04-1464.
Supreme Court Rejects Women's Sports Case - Yahoo! News
High Court Declines to Review Libel Suit - Yahoo! News
--
Other stories
A Washington State judge has ruled to uphold last November's gubernatorial election.
Chelan County Superior Court Judge John Bridges said the Republicans failed to prove that GOP candidate Dino Rossi would have won if the disputed ballots had been declared disregarded.
"Unless an election is clearly invalid, when the people have spoken their verdict should not be disturbed by the courts," Bridges said. Nullifying the election, he said, would be "the ultimate act of judicial egotism and judicial activism."
Judge Bridges did agree that the state's election system is flawed, but he was not the proper person to remedy those flaws.
"This court is not in the position to fix the deficiencies in the election process," Bridges said. "However, the voters are in a position to demand of their legislative and executive bodies that remedial measures be taken immediately."
Republicans say they will appeal the ruling.
While the GOP does not like the outcome, Judge Bridges did make a proper ruling. Instead of being an activist judge, Bridges saw the flaws in the system, but ruled the fix must come either from the legislature or the people. In this writer's opinion, the gubernatorial election was stolen by corrupt election officials in King County, Judge Bridges made his decision based on the facts and the appropriate law. Judge Brides should be commended.
Wash. Judge Upholds Gubernatorial Vote - Yahoo! News
--
South Dakota will have a new abortion law effective July 1. The new law requires doctors to inform women seeking abortions that the procedure ends the life of a human and terminates the constitutional relationship a woman has with her unborn child. It also requires doctors to tell women about the medical risks of abortion, including a statement that abortion could cause an increased risk of suicide.
State law already requires "informed consent," but the new law requires doctors to give the additional information before a patient can sign the form.
Planned Parenthood is asking a federal judge to strike down the law, saying it forces doctors to read state-scripted medical information that they claim is inaccurate.
"Politicians can't force doctors to tell patients things that aren't true. That's bad medicine," Kate Looby, a Planned Parenthood representative said. "Just because politicians believe something is true doesn't make it so."
The Planned Parenthood lawsuit challenges the law as an unconstitutional burden on a woman's right to choose an abortion.
A hearing date has not been set.
Organization Challenges S.D. Abortion Law - Yahoo! News
--
More tomorrow.
No comments:
Post a Comment