Sun Sentinel Palm Beach Edition
Top court at full strength faces full docket
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court opens its new term Oct. 2 and will quickly take up major disputes involving President Donald Trump, immigration policy, religious liberty, gay rights and partisan gerrymandering.
Here are the major questions before the court this fall:
Trump travel ban: Can Trump temporarily block the entry of foreign travelers from six majority Muslim nations because they pose a “heightened risk” of terrorism, or is his order unconstitutional because it reflects bias against Muslims and is not based on evidence of a true security threat?
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in California and the 4th Circuit in Virginia struck down Trump’s order, but in late June, the Supreme Court revived it in part. It also agreed to hear Trump’s claim of broad power over immigration.
But the case may be dismissed as moot because the time limits in the order will have expired by the time arguments are presented.
Trump v. Hawaii and Trump v. IRAP is scheduled to be heard Oct. 10.
Religious liberty and gay
rights: Can a baker refuse to make a wedding cake for a gay couple because of his Christian beliefs, or can the state require that businesses open to the public provide “full and equal” services to customers without regard to their sexual orientation?
Colorado and 20 other states have civil rights laws that protect gays and lesbians. Trump administration lawyers have urged the court to carve out a “narrow” exception based on the freedom of speech for cake makers, photographers, musicians and others whose work is “expressive.”
Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado is due to be heard in December.
Partisan gerrymandering: When one party controls a state’s government, can it draw election district maps to “entrench” itself in the majority for another decade, even in elections where most voters cast ballots for other party?
Since the 1980s, the justices have frowned on “partisan gerrymandering” as unfair and corrupt, but they have not agreed on a rule for when an election map tilts so far as to be unconstitutional. By contrast, the court has outlawed racial gerrymandering, but often the lines between racial and partisan gerrymandering are blurred.
The justices will tackle partisan gerrymandering again in a Wisconsin case, Gill v. Whitford, to be heard on Oct. 3.
Cellphone tracking and
privacy: Can the FBI and police obtain cellphone data to track the movements of a crime suspect because such phone company-held records are not private, or must they first obtain a search warrant based on probable cause from a magistrate?
Privacy advocates on the right and left urge the court to strictly protect these records. However, investigators say they sometimes need the data to track travel patterns to identify a crime suspect or a terrorist.
Carpenter v. United States is to be heard in December.
Employees and group arbitration: Can companies require workers to waive their rights to join any class or collective action against their employer and instead resolve disputes as individuals through binding arbitration?
Obama administration lawyers told the court these arbitration clauses were illegal under the National Labor Relations Act of 1935, which said workers had a right to join a union or take “other concerted activities.” In June, the Trump administration switched sides and said these waivers could be enforced under the Federal Arbitration Act of 1925.
The court will hear the arguments Oct. 2 in NLRB v. Murphy Oil and two related cases. Jail before deportation: Can noncitizens who are slated for deportation be kept in jail indefinitely, or must they be given a bail hearing after six months?
Acting on a class-action suit in Los Angeles, the 9th Circuit Court said such detainees have a right to bail after six months if they pose no danger to the public and are unlikely to flee. The justices heard the government’s appeal in November, shortly after Trump’s election, but could not reach a decision.
The case, Jennings v. Rodriguez, will be argued again Oct. 3, and this time Justice Neil Gorsuch can cast the deciding vote. Can states remove voters from their rolls if they fail to vote for two years and do not respond to notices over four years?
The 6th Circuit Court agreed with civil rights lawyers who said this procedure in Ohio violated a federal law that says a voter’s registration may not be canceled for “a failure to vote.”
Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute is to be heard Nov. 8.
Public employees and
union fees: Can states require teachers and other unionized public employees to pay a fee to cover the cost of collective bargaining?
The court upheld such laws 40 years ago, but antiunion lawyers say forced payments violate the freespeech rights of workers.
The court was set to decide this issue in 2016 in the case of a California teacher, but after Justice Antonin Scalia died, the justices were split 4-4.
An Illinois child care worker has a new appeal pending this month. The court has not announced whether it will hear Janus v. AFSCME. Voting rolls and purges: