SCOTUS Should Be Handing Out More Decisions Today

[Annie]

As we all know, they are on a roll. I have to work, 9-5! (I like teacher hours better), but if you want to find out what they are doing, check here:

http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/

 

[Annie]

Here's what is on the agenda:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/25/AR2005062500539_pf.html

A Look at Remaining Supreme Court Cases

By The Associated Press
The Associated Press
Saturday, June 25, 2005; 12:36 PM

-- A look at the remaining cases of the Supreme Court's term:

TEN COMMANDMENTS: The constitutionality of Ten Commandments in public buildings and on government property, under the First Amendment's ban on an "establishment" of religion. (Van Orden v. Perry, 03-1500, and McCreary County v. ACLU, 03-1693)

FILE SHARING: Whether the entertainment industry may sue technology manufacturers over consumers who use their products to steal music and movies online. (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios v. Grokster, 04-480)

INTERNET ACCESS: A test of the tight control cable companies hold over high-speed Internet service in a case that will determine whether the industry must open up its lines to competitors. (National Cable & Telecommunications Assoc. v. Brand X Internet Services, 04-277; FCC v. Brand X Internet Services, 04-281)

DEATH PENALTY: A look at courts' flexibility to reopen cases, in an appeal that asks if an appeals court was wrong to order more study of a Tennessee death row inmate's claims. (Bell v. Thompson, 04-514)

RESTRAINING ORDERS: Whether police can be sued for how they enforce restraining orders. (Castle Rock, Colo., v. Gonzales, 04-278)

 

[no1tovote4]

RESTRAINING ORDERS: Whether police can be sued for how they enforce restraining orders. (Castle Rock, Colo., v. Gonzales, 04-278)

There is more to this case than just how they enforce restraining orders. The Press simplified this here to a level where most people would not support the suit. The suit was over whether they deliberately did not enforce the order and therefore were not doing their jobs and the suit covers whether the citizenry can sue the police force for literally not doing their jobs. Cops are often protected, while on the job, from any lawsuits. This particular suit is due to perceived inaction and whether people can sue if the cops literally do not do what they are supposed to.

If they rule in favor of the Gonzales family they can bring a suit, there is no gaurantee that they will win. The cops may prove that they did their jobs and that there is therefore no evidence of negligence on the part of the police dept. This whole thing is whether people can sue when the cops seem to be deliberately ignoring their work.