At high court, states' authority in question
Full article
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday (Oct. 6) begins a new term that so far lacks the controversy of last term’s politically explosive cases on gun control, the death penalty and voter-identification laws, but that still is grabbing the attention of states.
Of top concern to states — and to the tobacco and pharmaceutical industries — are a pair of cases testing whether federal law trumps state consumer-protection policies that let residents sue cigarette and drug makers over the way their goods are described.
The cases, one from Maine and the other from Vermont, could force changes in the way cigarettes and prescription drugs are marketed and labeled and could open up new avenues of litigation for consumers who feel they’ve been harmed by products. The two cases “dwarf everything in terms of real effects,” said Michael S. Greve, who studies the Supreme Court at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington, D.C.
Entering its fourth year under Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., the high court already has agreed to hear arguments in more than a dozen cases important to states, including a land dispute between Hawaii and native Hawaiians, a challenge to racially based redistricting in North Carolina and an appeal that could affect how forensic evidence is presented in criminal trials in Massachusetts and in at least 40 other states.
The justices refused to add to their calendar a fresh look at one of their most high-profile decisions of last term, in which they invalidated laws in Louisiana and five other states that imposed the death penalty on those who rape, but do not kill, children. Despite a rare factual error discovered in the 5-4 decision, the justices on Wednesday (Oct. 1) rejected Louisiana’s plea to reopen the case. The initial ruling drew sharp criticism from both presidential candidates, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday (Oct. 6) begins a new term that so far lacks the controversy of last term’s politically explosive cases on gun control, the death penalty and voter-identification laws, but that still is grabbing the attention of states.
Of top concern to states — and to the tobacco and pharmaceutical industries — are a pair of cases testing whether federal law trumps state consumer-protection policies that let residents sue cigarette and drug makers over the way their goods are described.
The cases, one from Maine and the other from Vermont, could force changes in the way cigarettes and prescription drugs are marketed and labeled and could open up new avenues of litigation for consumers who feel they’ve been harmed by products. The two cases “dwarf everything in terms of real effects,” said Michael S. Greve, who studies the Supreme Court at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington, D.C.
Entering its fourth year under Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., the high court already has agreed to hear arguments in more than a dozen cases important to states, including a land dispute between Hawaii and native Hawaiians, a challenge to racially based redistricting in North Carolina and an appeal that could affect how forensic evidence is presented in criminal trials in Massachusetts and in at least 40 other states.
The justices refused to add to their calendar a fresh look at one of their most high-profile decisions of last term, in which they invalidated laws in Louisiana and five other states that imposed the death penalty on those who rape, but do not kill, children. Despite a rare factual error discovered in the 5-4 decision, the justices on Wednesday (Oct. 1) rejected Louisiana’s plea to reopen the case. The initial ruling drew sharp criticism from both presidential candidates, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain.
Leave a comment