Time Winding Down On High Court

As the Supreme Court's term nears an end, there are still some major decisions pending, but the biggest mystery doesn't involve a case: It's whether any of the justices will retire.

"Anyone who knows about a possible retirement or two isn't talking. And anyone who is talking about those possibilities can't possibly know," says CBSNews.com Legal Analyst Andrew Cohen. "The buzz now suggests that perhaps both the Chief Justice and Justice O'Connor will be back on the bench next term and that's probably what everyone ought to assume will occur."

Among the major rulings left, reports CBS News Correspondent Barry Bagnato, are decisions on Ten Commandments displays, Internet file sharing, homeowners rights, and restraining orders against abusive spouses.

"By far the most interesting case left is the one involving Ten Commandment displays and whether they can be placed on public property," says Cohen. "And it's not surprising that the Justices have left it for last — they usually save their most controversial rulings for the very end of their session."

The Bush administration has argued that Ten Commandments displays should be allowed on government property because they pay tribute to America's religious and legal history.

"The idea of having a fence around the Ten Commandments to make clear the state has nothing to do with it, I think that is bending it too far," said acting Solicitor General Paul Clement in March, in arguing against a strict First Amendment wall between church and state.

David Friedman, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union who is challenging courthouse displays in Kentucky countered: "An assertion that the Ten Commandments is the source, the foundation of our legal system ... that is simply wrapping the Ten Commandments in the flag, and that's endorsement."

The Supreme Court expressed concerns in March over allowing entertainment companies to sue makers of software that allows Internet users to illegally download music and movies, questioning whether the threat of such legal action might stifle Web innovation.
During a lively argument, justices wondered aloud whether such lawsuits might have discouraged such past inventions as copy machines, videocassette recorders and iPod portable music players — all of which can be used to make illegal duplications of copyrighted documents, movies and songs.

"Some people in the technology world worry that a victory for the movie and music industry could create a serious liability problem by establishing the precedent that a company can be held liable for the illegal use of its products," said CBS News Technology Consultant Larry Magid.

"The companies that run these peer to peer networks claim that bad behavior, not the networks or technology, are to blame," said Magid.

Justice Stephen G. Breyer said the same software that can be used to steal copyrighted materials offered at least conceptually "some really excellent uses" that are legal.

Justice Antonin Scalia maintained that a ruling for entertainment companies could mean that if "I'm a new inventor, I'm going to get sued right away."

While seeming leery of allowing lawsuits, the court also appeared deeply troubled by efforts of the companies that manufacture so-called file-sharing software to encourage Internet piracy and profit from it.

In the homeowners' rights case, the issue is when governments may seize people's homes and businesses for economic development projects, a key question as cash-strapped cities seek ways to generate tax revenue.

At issue is the scope of the Fifth Amendment, which allows governments to take private property through eminent domain, provided the owner is given "just compensation" and the land is for "public use."
"The court took this case because it wants ... to give the states some guidance about when they can take private property and for what reason," said CBSNews.com legal analyst Andrew Cohen. "Right now many different states have many different standards about when the government can condemn private homes for public use."

Susette Kelo and several other homeowners in a working-class neighborhood in New London, Conn., filed a lawsuit after city officials announced plans to raze their homes to clear the way for a riverfront hotel, health club and offices. The residents refused to budge, arguing it was an unjustified taking of their property.

The fourth major case involves whether police can be sued if they don't enforce a protective order, reports CBS News Correspondent Wyatt Andrews. Jessica Gonzales begged police to enforce an order against her husband — on the night he murdered their children.

"What we need now is for officers to acknowledge that we are not a low priority. Family violence, you know, is not something to be ignored," Gonzales told CBS News in March.

Rehnquist's thyroid cancer was announced in a terse statement Oct. 25. The 80-year-old Chief Justice has received chemotherapy and radiation treatment, and, last fall, missed some court sessions and worked from home.

If he or an associate justice steps down, it would be the court's first opening since 1994.