Pubdate: Mon, 02 Oct 2000
Source: San Diego Union Tribune (CA)
Copyright: 2000 Union-Tribune Publishing Co.
Contact:  PO Box 120191, San Diego, CA, 92112-0191
Fax: (619) 293-1440
Website: http://www.uniontrib.com/
Forum: http://www.uniontrib.com/cgi-bin/WebX
Author: Laurie Asseo, Associated Press

HIGH COURT OPENS; DOCKET, ELECTION SHARE SPOTLIGHT

WASHINGTON -- Difficult questions about Americans' constitutional 
protection against unreasonable searches -- while in their homes, cars and 
even in hospital beds -- lead the Supreme Court's agenda as the justices 
begin their 2000-2001 term today.

Some observers, however, say the most important day for the nation's 
highest court will be Election Day. The next president will choose the next 
members of a court that has been divided 5-4 on some of the nation's most 
explosive issues.

The term that ended in June was a blockbuster. The justices upheld the 
Miranda warnings police must give before questioning criminal suspects, let 
the Boy Scouts ban homosexual troop leaders and struck down a state's law 
banning "partial-birth" abortion.

They also banned group prayers at public high school football games and 
prevented rape victims from suing their attackers in federal courts.

The court last week cleared its plate of the massive Microsoft antitrust 
dispute by sending it to a federal appeals court, thus delaying a final 
ruling perhaps for years.

The 47 cases granted review for the new term -- with about two dozen more 
to be added in coming months -- lack the political punch of last year's 
cases but will touch the lives of many ordinary Americans.

"It's already looming as a big year for the Fourth Amendment," which 
protects Americans against unreasonable searches and arrests, said Steven 
Shapiro of the American Civil Liberties Union.

A case that could affect the nation's 185 million licensed drivers asks 
whether police can arrest people for traffic violations punishable by a fine.

A Texas woman, whose lawyers call her a "typical motorist," says police 
went too far when they arrested, handcuffed and jailed her because she and 
her children were not wearing seat belts in the family pickup.

Other cases illustrate "the pressure that the war on drugs has exerted on 
the Fourth Amendment in particular and the Constitution in general," 
Shapiro said.

The justices will decide whether police can set up traffic checkpoints and 
stop motorists in hopes of catching people who sell or use illegal drugs.

Another war-on-drugs case asks whether public hospitals can test pregnant 
patients for drug use and tell police who tested positive. A South Carolina 
hospital tested patients' urine without a court warrant and, if the result 
was positive, women were arrested for endangering the fetus.

A case that was among a dozen granted review last week, when the justices 
got a head start on their new term, asks whether police need a search 
warrant to use a device to detect heat coming from someone's home.

An Oregon man was charged with growing marijuana after police said a 
heat-detecting device showed an unusual amount of heat coming from the roof 
over his garage.

Another marijuana-search case involves an Illinois man who was prevented by 
police from going inside his home until the officers could get a warrant to 
search for the drug.

The Clean Air Act dispute could yield an important ruling on environmental 
protection that also might limit other federal agencies' authority to write 
rules to implement laws passed by Congress.

Industry groups want the Environmental Protection Agency to consider costs, 
in addition to health benefits, in setting federal air-quality standards. 
The case began as a dispute over the EPA's 1997 standards for reducing smog 
and soot.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jo-D