High Court Rulings on Campaign Spending, Sentencing of Juveniles

Two other important Supreme Court decisions were announced yesterday.  The first upheld the Citizens United decision allowing unlimited corporate campaign donations.  (They struck down a Montana law which restricted campaign donations.)

The second decision by the Court said that it was a violation of the 8th Amendment to sentence juveniles to life imprisonment without a chance of parole.

Watch High Court Reaffirms Campaign Finance on PBS. See more from PBS NewsHour.

Supreme Court Ruling on Arizona's Controversial Immigration Law

Three important parts of the law were struck down, another upheld (for now at least).  The part that was upheld, sometimes called the "show me your papers" provision is seen by some as the most controversial part of the law.  A good explanation from Marcia Coyle on the NewsHour on PBS last night:

Watch Supreme Court Upholds Controversial Part of Immigration Law on PBS. See more from PBS NewsHour.

Supreme Court to Hear Legal Challenge to Health Care Law

Note:  I will try to get a brief summary of the law and the controversy surrounding it posted here soon.

The signing of the law was a high moment for the Obama Administration, which promised to solve many of the problems plaguing the American health care system, including estimates that 47 million Americans don't have health care insurance.

However, many conservatives, especially "Tea Party" activists thought the law went too far and challenged the constitutionality of it in court.  Those challenges have quickly worked their way through the system and Monday, the Supreme Court, announced its decision to hear the case in March of 2012.

The NBC Evening News report:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

You can also read more detailed coverage from the New York Times:

Justices to Hear Health Care Case as Race Heats Up

Supreme Court Hears Arguments in GPS Tracking Case

One of the more controversial cases of the Supreme Court term was heard this past week.

Below NBC has a short report on the case, and the oral arguments made before the Court.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Two more detailed sources on the case:

From the NY Times:

Court Casts a Wary Eye on Tracking by GPS

In an argument studded with references to George Orwell’s “1984” and the possibility that rapid advances in technology would soon allow the government to monitor everyone’s movements, the Supreme Court on Tuesday struggled to articulate how the Fourth Amendment’s ban on unreasonable searches and seizures should apply to the tracking of cars using GPS devices. The fit between 18th-century principles and 21st-century surveillance seemed to leave several justices frustrated.

From the NewsHour on PBS:

Supreme Court: Violent Video Games Protected by 1st Amendment

California enacted a law in 2005 restricting the sale or rental of violent video games to minors. In a 7-2 decision, the United States struck down that law as a violation of the free expression rights protected in the U.S. Constitution. Do you agree with the Court in this case, or do the representatives of the citizens of California have the right to enact laws they feel will protect young people (without the federal courts intervening)?

You can read the story here: Justices Reject Ban on Violent Video Games for Children

Some editorials which praise the Court's decision:

Editorials | U.S. Supreme Court got it right: Video-game ban restricts free speech


It’s Perverse, but It’s Also Pretend

(The case is Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association.)

The Supreme Court Considers Free Speech and Violent Video Games

Are video games that have extreme depictions of violence subject to 1st Amendment protection or should the government be able to regulate the amount of violence displayed in such games? The Supreme Court took up this case in November. I'd love to know what images they were shown in the Court briefings.

Anyhow, I found a few stories on this case:

The Supreme Court Considers Free Speech and Violent Video Games: A First Step Into the Brave New World of Virtual Reality?

Here is the opinion of one game designer, that thinks such games deserve to be protected by the First Amendment: Why the Supreme Court should rule that violent video games are free speech

The Supremes rule in the firefighter race case

From Newsweek:

Dahlia Lithwick: When Constitutional Worlds Collide

From Christian Science Monitor
Court rules for white firefighters, reversing Sotomayor panel | csmonitor.com

Supreme Court: Strip-search of 13-year-old girl was illegal

Supreme Court: Strip-search of 13-year-old girl was illegal | csmonitor.com

The decision sets the standard for how far school officials can go in conducting searches of students' property.

The case, Safford Unified School District No. 1 v. April Redding, arises from a strip search conducted in October 2003 at Safford Middle School. The girl, Savana Redding, was suspected of bringing high-strength ibuprofen to school to share with other students during lunch period.

Supreme Court Decisions on Voting Rights Act and Special Education

Listen to the discussion from the Newshour on PBS

Justice Ginsberg looking forward to having another female on the high cout

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg's thoughts on the importance of having a balance of men and women on the Supreme Court were published recently in an article on CNN's website.

"Women belong in all places where decision are being made," she said. "I don't say [the split] should be 50-50. It could be 60 percent men, 40 percent women, or the other way around. It shouldn't be that women are the exception."

Ginsburg noted gender differences are "seldom in the outcome." But then, she said, "it is sometimes in the outcome."

Ginsburg expressed frustration in that interview with how her male colleagues view her role, and how they view certain cases. She said in closed door conferences where all the justices gather to decide cases and pending appeals, her views occasionally are ignored. "When I will say something -- and I don't think I'm a confused speaker -- and it isn't until somebody else says it that everyone will focus on the point."