![](\"http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/Components/Art/USNEWS/2005/May/050526/SCOTUS_Keycases_Hed_0506.gif\")
";
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams.appFooter = "Source: NBC's Pete Williams";
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams.appNavStyle = 3;
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams.appLayout = 3;
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams.copyWidth = 300;
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams.copyMargin = 9;
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i++] = new Array("","Introduction","Pete Williams","http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Bylines/mugs/NBC%20News/nbc_williams_pete.htease.jpg","","", "", "", "", "", "right", "", "", "97", "148", "#666666", "", "", "", "");
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i-1].body = "NBC's Pete Williams offers his take on the important cases decided by the United States Supreme Court in its 2005-2006 term.Click on one of the links at left to read more about the case and its outcome before the court.";
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i++] = new Array("","Doctor-assisted dying","","","","", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "");
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i-1].body = "Gonzales v Oregon - Doctor-assisted dying
Case 04-623
Argued: Wednesday, Oct. 5, 2005
Issue: Should doctors be barred from prescribing a lethal dose of medicine to terminally ill patients, who can use it to end their own lives? [Argument transcript]
Decided: Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006
Decision: By a vote of 6-3, the court upheld Oregon's 1997 physician-assisted suicide law, saying it trumped federal authority to regulate doctors.
[Click here to read the court's .pdf decision]";
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i++] = new Array("","Parental abortion notification","","","","", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "");
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i-1].body = "Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood - Parental abortion notification
Case 04-1144
Argued: Wednesday, Nov. 30, 2005
Issue: Must New Hampshire's law prohibiting abortions for minors unless the parents have been notified make an exception when the health of a pregnant girl is at risk? [Argument transcript]
Decided: Wednesday, Jan. 18, 2006
Decision: The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that a lower court was wrong to strike down New Hampshire abortion restrictions, dodging a major ruling and ordering the lower court to reconsider the law’s constitutionality.
[Click here to read the court's .pdf decision]";
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i++] = new Array("","Churches & ceremonial hallucinogens","","","","", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "");
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i-1].body = " Gonzales v O Centro Espirita - Churches & ceremonial hallucinogens
Case 04-1084
Argued: Tuesday, Nov. 1, 2005
Issue: Can the government ban a church from importing hallucinogens used in religious rites? [Argument transcript]
Decided: Tuesday, Feb. 21, 2006
Decision: In a unanimous decision, the court ruled the church may use hallucinogenic tea as part of its religious ritual and that the federal government had not met its burden to show that it could prohibit \"the sect's sincere religious practice.\"
[Click here to read the court's .pdf decision]";
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i++] = new Array("","Grass roots campaign limits","","","","", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "");
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i-1].body = "Wisconsin Right to Life v FEC - Campaign finance spending limits
Case 04-1581
Argued: Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006
Issue: Should federal campaign advertising restrictions have an exception for grass root ads that coincide with elections? [Argument transcript]
Decided: Monday, January 23, 2006
Decision: In a unanimous decision, the court vacated the district court opinion, instructing the lower court to consider Wisconsin Right to Life's as-applied challenge. The Court noted that the district court misinterpreted the relevance of a footnote in the Court's 2003 opinion in McConnell v. FEC.
[Click here to read the court's .pdf decision]";
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i++] = new Array("","Military recruiters & campus access","","","","", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "");
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i-1].body = "Rumsfeld v Academic & Institutional Rights - Military recruiters & campus access
Case 04-1152
Argued: Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2005
Issue: Can colleges and universities bar military recruiters from their campuses because of policy disputes, without fear of losing federal funds? [Argument transcript]
Decided: Monday, March 6, 2006
Decision: The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that colleges that accept federal money must allow military recruiters on campus, despite university objections to the Pentagon's \"don't ask, don't tell\" policy on gays.
[Click here to read the court's .pdf decision]";
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i++] = new Array("","Death penalty appeals","","","","", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "");
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i-1].body = "Paul House v Ricky Bell - Death penalty appeal evidence
Case 04-8990
Argued: Wednesday, Jan. 11, 2006
Issue: How strong must new evidence be before death row inmates can mount new challenges to their sentences? [Argument Transcript]
Decided: Monday, June 12, 2006
Decision: The Supreme Court ruled by a vote of 5-3 (the case was argued before Justice Alito assumed his position) that Paul House can use DNA evidence to attempt to show his innocence 20 years after he was convicted of murdering a neighbor.
[Click here to read the court's .pdf decision]";
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i++] = new Array("","First Amendment & whistleblowers","","","","", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "");
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i-1].body = "Gil Garcetti v Richard Ceballos - First Amendment & whistleblower rights
Case 04-473
Argued: Wednesday, Oct. 12, 2005
Re-argued: Tuesday, Mar. 21, 2006
Issue: Do whistleblowers in a public agency have First Amendment protection? [Argument transcript]
Decided: Tuesday, May 30, 2006
Decision: in a 5-4 decisin, the court ruled public employees' free-speech rights are protected when they speak out as citizens, but not when they speak out in the course of their official duties. [Click here to read the court's .pdf decision]";
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i++] = new Array("","State campaign limits","","","","", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "");
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i-1].body = "Consolidated cases (Randall v. Sorrell, Vt. Republican State Committee v. Sorrell and Sorrell v. Randall) - State campaign limits
Case 04-1528, 04-1530 & 04-1697
Argued: Tuesday, Feb. 28, 2006
Issue: Can states limit campaign donations and spending? [04-1528 details] [04-1530 details] [04-1697 details]
Decided: Monday, June 26, 2006
Decision: By a 6-3 vote, the high court ruled that that Vermont's limits on contributions and spending in political campaigns are too low and improperly hinder the ability of candidates to raise money and speak to voters, therby the restrictions on contributions and spending violated constitutional free-speech rights. [Click here to read the court's .pdf decision]";
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i++] = new Array("","Kansas death penalty","","","","", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "");
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i-1].body = "Kansas v Michael March - Kansas Death Penalty
Case 04-1170
Argument: Wednesday, Dec. 7, 2005
Re-argument: Tuesday, Apr. 25, 2005
Issue: Is the Kansas death-penalty law unconstitutional? [Argument transcript]
Decided: Monday, June 26, 2006
Decision: Justice Samuel Alito broke a tie Monday to rule that Kansas' death penalty law is constitutional. By a 5-to-4 vote, the justices said the Kansas Supreme Court incorrectly interpreted the Eighth Amendment's protection against cruel and unusual punishment to strike down the state's death penalty. [Click here to read the court's .pdf decision]";
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i++] = new Array("","Texas redistricting","","","","", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "");
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i-1].body = "Latin American Citizens v. Rick Perry - Texas Redistricting
Cases: 05-254, 05-276 & 05-439
Argued: Wednesday, Mar. 1, 2006
Issue: Whether the Texas Congressional Redistricting Plan using outdated, inaccurate 2000 Census data resulted in malapportioned districts, in violation of \"one person, one vote\" with the purpose of gaining partisan advantage and whether proof of racially polarized voting is overcome by evidence of partisan affiliation of minority voters. [Argument transcript]
Decided: Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Decision: The Supreme Court upheld most of the redistricting, but threw out a portion of the Texas congressional map, saying some of the new boundaries failed to protect minority voting rights. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority, said the 100,000 Hispanics shifted out of a district represented by a Republican incumbent and into a new, oddly shaped district, do not have a chance to elect a candidate of their choosing under the plan. Lawmakers will have to adjust boundary lines to address the court's concerns. [Click here to read the court's .pdf decision]";
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i++] = new Array("","Guantanamo detainees","","","","", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "");
SCOTUS_PeteWilliams[i-1].body = "Hamdan v. Rumsfeld - Guantanamo detainees
Case: 05-184
Argued: Tuesday, Mar. 28, 2006
Issue: Whether the military commission established to try individuals alleged war crimes in the \"war on terror\" is duly authorized under Congress's or the inherent powers of the president and whether, under the Geneva Convention, individuals can be legally detained by the Executive branch? [Argument transcript]
Decided: Thursday, June 29, 2006
Decision: The Supreme Court ruled President Bush overstepped his authority in creating military war crimes trials - calling them illegal under U.S. laws and the Geneva conventions. [Click here to read the court's .pdf decision]";
// END editorial data