Supreme Court will re-hear Texas affirmative action
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court said Monday it will dive back into the fight over the use of race in admissions at the University of Texas, a decision that presages tighter limits on affirmative action in higher education.
The justices said they will hear for a second time the case of a white woman who was denied admission to the university's flagship Austin campus.
The conservative-leaning federal appeals court in New Orleans has twice upheld the university's admissions process, including in a ruling last year that followed a Supreme Court order to reconsider the woman's case.
The case began in 2008 when Abigail Fisher, who is white, was denied admission to the University of Texas's flagship Austin campus because she did not graduate in the top 10 percent of her high school class - the criterion for 75 percent of the school's admissions. The university also passed her over for a position among the remaining 25 percent, which is reserved for special scholarships and people who meet a formula for personal achievement that includes race as a factor.
The case went to the U.S. Supreme Court in June 2013. But rather than issue a landmark decision on affirmative action, it voted 7-1 to tell a lower appeals court to take another look at Fisher's lawsuit. That meant the university's admissions policies remained unchanged.
Last year, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals again upheld the university's admissions policy. Fisher is a graduate of Louisiana State University.
Justice Elena Kagan is not taking part in the case. She sat out the first round as well, presumably because of her work on the case when she served in the Justice Department before joining the court.
The case, Fisher v. University of Texas, 14-981, will be argued in the fall.
Justices won't hear Google appeal in dispute with Oracle
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court is staying out of a long-running legal battle between technology giants Oracle and Google over copyright protection for a computer program that powers most of the world's smartphones and computer tablets.
The justices said Monday they won't review an appeals court ruling that said software maker Oracle Corp. could copyright portions of the Java programming platform that Google Inc. used to build its popular Android software for mobile devices.
Oracle is seeking roughly $1 billion in damages for claims that Google stole some of the Java technology that Oracle acquired when it bought Sun Microsystems Inc.
A federal district court ruled in 2012 that federal copyright laws didn't cover the program. But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed, saying it was copyright protected.
Justices won't hear appeal from BP, Anadarko over Gulf spill
NEW ORLEANS (AP) - The Supreme Court won't hear appeals from BP and Anadarko Petroleum Corp. over Clean Water Act fines for the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
The justices on Monday let stand a lower court ruling that said the owners of the blown-out Macondo well could not avoid federal fines for the spill by blaming another company's failed equipment.
The companies had argued that the oil had not leaked from the well itself, but from the broken underwater pipe that connected the well to the rig owned by Transocean Ltd. That riser was ripped apart when the burning rig sank. The companies argued that the rig's owners should be the only companies to pay.
A district judge and a federal appeals court rejected that argument.
Justices uphold Arizona's system for redistricting
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court has upheld Arizona congressional districts drawn by an independent commission and rejected a constitutional challenge from Republican lawmakers.
The 5-4 outcome Monday preserves efforts in 13 states to limit partisan influence in redistricting. Most notably, California uses an independent commission to draw electoral boundaries for its largest-in-the-nation congressional delegation.
Court OKs use of drug implicated in botched executions
WASHINGTON (AP) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday upheld the use of a controversial drug that has been implicated in several botched executions. Meanwhile, two of the justices said for first time that the death penalty itself probably is unconstitutional.
The justices voted 5-4 in a case from the state of Oklahoma that the sedative midazolam can be used in executions without violating a constitutional prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.
The drug used in executions in Arizona, Ohio and Oklahoma in 2014 took longer than usual and raised concerns that it did not perform its intended task of putting inmates into a coma-like sleep.
In Oklahoma, state officials tried to halt the lethal injection after the inmate writhed on the gurney and moaned. He died 43 minutes after the process began.
Executions have been on hold in Ohio since a troubling 26-minute execution in 2014 during which a prisoner getting a first-ever two-drug combo repeatedly gasped and snorted. Last year, Arizona officials were cleared of any wrongdoing in an execution that lasted nearly two hours, but they nevertheless changed the drugs they use to put inmates to death.
Justice Samuel Alito said for a conservative majority Monday that arguments the drug could not be used effectively as a sedative in executions is speculative.
In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said, "Under the court's new rule, it would not matter whether the state intended to use midazolam, or instead to have petitioners drawn and quartered, slowly tortured to death, or actually burned at the stake."
Alito responded, saying "the dissent's resort to this outlandish rhetoric reveals the weakness of its legal arguments."
In a separate dissent, Justice Stephen Breyer said the time has come for the court to debate whether the death penalty itself is constitutional. Another justice joined that opinion.
The Supreme Court's involvement in the case began in January with an unusually public disagreement among the justices over executions.
Justices allow new hearings in North Carolina capital cases
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court has left in place lower court rulings ordering hearings over jurors in two North Carolina death penalty trials who reached beyond the jury room for biblical references to help their deliberations.
The justices on Monday rejected North Carolina's appeal of the two rulings by the federal appeals court in Richmond, Virginia.
In one case, a juror called her father in search of a biblical verse to help her decide between life and death for defendant Jason Wayne Hurst, who was sentenced to death for the 2002 shooting death of an acquaintance in Asheboro, North Carolina. The father pointed her to a verse containing the phrase "an eye for an eye."
The appeals court ordered hearings to determine if jurors were improperly influenced.
High court won't review Arizona, Kansas citizen proof rule
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court will continue allowing residents of Arizona and Kansas to register to vote using a federal form without having to provide proof of citizenship.
The justices on Monday rejected an appeal from Republican officials in those two states who have sought to enforce laws requiring new voters to submit a birth certificate, passport or other papers documenting U.S. citizenship.
Supporters of the laws have said that they prevent noncitizens from voting, particularly those living in the U.S. illegally. Critics have said incidents of noncitizens registering to vote are extremely rare, and that such Republican-backed laws hurt voter registration efforts and disenfranchise voters from certain groups that tend to vote Democrat, including minorities and college students.
Justices won't hear ex-Rep. Rick Renzi appeal of conviction
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court won't hear an appeal from former Arizona Rep. Rick Renzi seeking a new trial after his conviction on public corruption, money laundering and other charges.
The justices on Monday let stand a lower court ruling rejecting arguments that prosecutors violated a constitutional clause by introducing evidence about Renzi's legislative work.
Renzi was convicted of conspiring to use his congressional seat to make two companies buy land owned by his former business associate so that the associate could repay a debt he owed to Renzi.
Renzi began serving a three-year prison sentence in February.
Published: Tue, Jun 30, 2015
