The Supreme court will rule this month on several major civil rights issues. It is scheduled to issue rulings every Monday, but is likely to add days to accommodate the number of rulings that it has yet to issue. Here are the top four rulings to watch:
1 Affirmative action in higher education: In October, a divided court squared off over the future of affirmative action in college admissions, with liberals defending a university's right to assemble racially diverse student bodies, and conservatives worrying about the constitutional rights of those who are denied admission because of their race. It has potentially landmark consequences for the use of racial preferences and the debate over crafting the nation's institutions of higher learning to reflect the nation's diversity. The court has four basic options. It could decline to decide the central issue if it credits the university's argument that white applicant Abigail Fisher did not suffer the sort of injury that gives a plaintiff standing to sue. It could uphold the Texas program as constitutional. It could say that race-conscious admissions may not be used where race-neutral ones have produced substantial diversity. Or it could say race may not be used in admissions decisions at all.
2 Voting Rights Act: The court is taking a fresh look at the Voting Rights Act, the landmark 1965 law that opened the polls to millions of Southern blacks, who for decades were victims of discrimination and intimidation. The high court dispute is over the law's requirement that several states, including virtually the entire South, get federal clearance before changing their voting rules. The law applies to nine states — Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia — and to scores of counties and municipalities in six other states. During arguments in February, the court's conservative justices cast doubt on the law, questioning whether it was outdated. The ruling could reshape how future elections are conducted.
3 California's Prop 8: A ruling on California's Proposition 8 — a ballot initiative that banned same-sex marriages in the state in 2008 — could establish or reject a constitutional right to same-sex marriage. The high court has several options. It could leave California's ban on same- sex marriage in place unless voters there choose to revisit the issue. It could allow same-sex marriage in California but not require it elsewhere. It could allow same-sex marriages in California and in the eight other states that currently have comprehensive civil union or domestic partnership laws. It could address the broader question of whether the Constitution requires states to allow such marriages. Or it could rule that same-sex marriages are not covered by the Constitution.
4 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA): The court also will decide whether Congress can deprive legally married same-sex couples of federal benefits otherwise available to married people. Current federal law — which defines marriage as between only a man and a woman — requires the federal government to deny benefits to gay and lesbian couples married in states that allow such unions. The case concerns two New York City women, Edith Windsor and Thea Clara Spyer, who were married in 2007 in Canada. Spyer died in 2009, and Windsor inherited her property. The law did not allow the IRS to treat Windsor as a surviving spouse, and she faced a tax bill of $363,000 that a spouse in an opposite-sex marriage would not have had to pay. Windsor sued, and in October the federal appeals court in New York struck down the law. It also was the first decision from a federal appeals court to say that laws treating same- sex couples differently must be subjected to heightened judicial scrutiny. Because of its significance, the same-sex marriage rulings are expected to be the final rulings of the term.
news services
