Advertisement
HomeCollectionsSupreme Court
IN THE NEWS

Supreme Court

FEATURED ARTICLES
NEWS
January 28, 2010
When one person's ability to make himself heard is may times superior to that of his neighbor, that first person can overpower the voice of the second and drown it out. When this is done, the second person's right to free expression has been denied because such drowned-out speech does not exist in any practical sense if nobody hears it. The Supreme Court, in ruling that there shall be no limits on corporate donations to political candidates, empowered...
ARTICLES BY DATE
NEWS
By Cal Thomas | October 11, 2014
Three points need to be made about Monday's  decision by the Supreme Court not to decide whether the equal protection clause of the Constitution grants people of the same sex the right to marry. Point 1: While the court's liberal wing probably wanted to accept cases banning same-sex marriage in five states that have been overturned by three different federal appeals courts in recent months, the conservative majority, along with swing Justice Anthony Kennedy, apparently wished to see states resolve the issue.
Advertisement
NEWS
June 3, 2010
I heartily concur with your concerns about the Supreme Court's recent decision revising the 1969 Miranda ruling ("Eroding Miranda," June 2). This ruling constituted a clear defense against self-incrimination to an individual suspected of a crime. The new decision makes it more difficult for a suspect to invoke this right. It is unclear, in this case, whether the suspect understood this right, but he clearly should not have been questioned further in the absence of an explicit indication — his signature — that he understood his rights and chose not to invoke them.
NEWS
By Leonard Pitts Jr and By Leonard Pitts Jr | October 9, 2014
Our topic du jour: the latest stunning milestone in the march toward gay equality. No, the other stunning milestone. We will get around to what the Supreme Court did (more accurately, declined to do) in a moment. But first: Have you seen the new Cheerios commercial? It broke out online a few days ago, a spot starring these two gay French Canadian men and their adopted daughter, a brown-skinned (African-Canadian?) toddler named Raphaelle. In the three-minute clip, Andre and Jonathan talk about the love at first sight blind date that brought them together and how they thought they could never be dads because they are gay. All the while, Raphaelle is squirming, eating Cheerios, leaning from one father to the other and otherwise committing shameless acts of cuteness.
NEWS
by Annie Linskey | June 25, 2012
The U.S. Supreme Court this morning upheld Maryland's new Congressional map, clearing up one last legal question and affirming that the state's prison population can be counted at their last known address. The new method of counting prisoners was adopted after Sen. Catherine Pugh, of Baltimore, successfully pushed legislation intended to boost population in the city. Previously prisoners were counted at their correctional institutions, a practice that critics said unfairly increased the population of prison towns.
NEWS
January 25, 2010
The 5-4 decision by the Supreme Court allowing corporations to pour millions into federal elections is frightening and dangerous ("And now, the deluge," Jan. 25). Even more alarming is that many of us never saw it coming. In fact this "gem" really took me by surprise. I cringe to think where the Citizens United v. FEC decision will lead. In coming campaigns, corporations will be lining up to shovel funds into their favorite candidates' war chests. If Americans took greater interest in local politics, such a judicial bombshell would not be so troublesome.
NEWS
By Jules Witcover | April 3, 2012
Nothing has focused as much attention on the Supreme Court since the 2000 Florida election recount case as last week's arguments over the constitutionality of President Obama's health care act. The outcome, expected this summer, will hang ominously over this year's presidential campaign until then, and beyond. Already the radio and television airwaves, the Internet, newspaper accounts and commentary are filled with descriptions of the exchanges between the lawyers arguing pro and con before the justices who will decide the fate of the controversial law. Most of these observations are second-hand, based on transcripts and on audio recordings only fairly recently permitted, because television cameras are barred.
NEWS
July 22, 2014
In a letter in the Sun, Kelli Kirchner of Cumberland expresses her happiness with the Supreme Court's Hobby Lobby decision and seems to believe no one should question or try to change it ( "Why is Mikulski trying to 'fix' the Supreme Court decision?" July 20). Well, I have news for her. As long as we have freedom of speech (as protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution), we will always be free to question and try to change (via legislation or constitutional amendment) any decision of any court.
NEWS
October 22, 2012
I wonder how many Americans have an understanding of what is probably the most profound consequence of the 2012 election. With several of the U.S. Supreme Court justices in their 70s, it is expected that anywhere from one to four justices will retire during the next four years, leaving vacancies to be nominated by the president who is in office at the time. Currently, the court is evenly divided between moderates and conservatives, which is a good thing so that no political ideology will consistently affect laws and life in the United States.
NEWS
By Erin Cox and The Baltimore Sun | April 2, 2014
Maryland's heated primary race for governor could get another twist if Wednesday's Supreme Court decision also strikes down the state's cap on how much residents can donate to state political campaigns. Minutes after the Supreme Court struck down aggregate contribution limits in federal races, Jared DeMarinis' phone at the Maryland Board of Elections began ringing off the hook. “Everyone wants to know: What does this mean?” said DeMarinis, director of campaign finance and candidacy.
NEWS
October 6, 2014
Marriage equality took one of its biggest leaps forward today without anything happening at all. By deciding not to hear any of the same-sex marriage cases appealed to it, the Supreme Court immediately voided bans on gay marriage in five more states - Utah, Oklahoma, Virginia, Indiana and Wisconsin - and likely did so in six others that are part of the same appellate circuits. It was the largest number of states to realize marriage equality on one day, topping the three (including Maryland)
FEATURES
By Kevin Rector, The Baltimore Sun | September 26, 2014
The U.S. Supreme Court is meeting on Monday for the first time since June, and could make a decision to hear a new same-sex marriage case. On the justices' agenda for the closed-door conference are appeals to cases in Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin, won by gay couples that favor a Supreme Court decision on their lower court victories. Four out of nine justices would have to vote to take up any particular case , and they are under no obligation to do so and could hold off on deciding whether to consider one of the cases until a later conference.
NEWS
September 4, 2014
The air of seeming inevitability that had developed around the idea of a successful constitutional challenge to state bans on gay marriage was punctured Wednesday by a federal judge in Louisiana. After 21 consecutive decisions favoring marriage equality in federal district and appellate courts since the Supreme Court struck down part of the Defense of Marriage Act, federal District Judge Martin L. C. Feldman upheld the ban on same-sex marriage that Louisiana voters overwhelmingly supported in 2004.
NEWS
July 22, 2014
In a letter in the Sun, Kelli Kirchner of Cumberland expresses her happiness with the Supreme Court's Hobby Lobby decision and seems to believe no one should question or try to change it ( "Why is Mikulski trying to 'fix' the Supreme Court decision?" July 20). Well, I have news for her. As long as we have freedom of speech (as protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution), we will always be free to question and try to change (via legislation or constitutional amendment) any decision of any court.
NEWS
July 20, 2014
On her website, Sen. Barbara Mikulski proclaims that she is joining other senators to introduce a "legislative fix to protect women's health" following the Supreme Court's recent decision in the Hobby Lobby case. Whether you are for abortion or against abortion, whether you think your employer should cover all birth control or not, whether you are a women or a man, this bill should bother you. Why? Because our Founding Fathers created three branches of government to check and balance each other.
NEWS
July 9, 2014
Jenny Black, the president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Maryland, has condemned the Supreme Court's Hobby Lobby decision and another case striking down a Massachusetts law barring protesters from coming within 30 feet of an abortion clinic ( "In 2014, why are women still struggling to get basic health care?" July 2). Yet both rulings are small steps in the recognition and restoration of the inalienable rights of religious freedom and peaceful protest. Neither decision extends rights nor abrogates the rights of others.
NEWS
By Leonard Pitts Jr | July 5, 2013
Last week was bittersweet for the cause of human dignity. On one hand, the Supreme Court gave us reason for applause, striking down barriers against the full citizenship of gay men and lesbians. On the other, it gave us reason for dread, gutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The 5-4 decision was stunning and despicable, but not unexpected. The country has been moving in this direction for years. The act is sometimes called the crown jewel of the Civil Rights Movement, but it was even more than that, the most important piece of legislation in the cause of African-American freedom since Reconstruction.
NEWS
August 5, 2010
Congratulations on your new humor column ("No more 'Ivies' on the Supreme Court," Commentary, Aug. 5). Cummings, Hoyer, and O'Malley for the Supreme Court. Absolutely hilarious. Perhaps you could add illustrations and use this to replace Doonesbury, which is not nearly as humorous. Earle S. Dashiell
NEWS
July 6, 2014
The challenge and threat to the disabled, workers and public sector unions following the Supreme Court's decision in Harris v. Quinn ( "Public unions at risk," July 1) is real. Yet again the court has taken action abridging protections afforded working people who have done so much to sustain what remains of our ever shrinking middle class. For years, labor unions have been under increasing pressure, and it is no coincidence that the decline in union membership across the private and public sectors has coincided with the greatest income inequality we've seen since the Great Depression.
NEWS
July 5, 2014
People don't have to work at Hobby Lobby, nor do people have to shop there ( "Corporations trump people in Supreme Court's Hobby Lobby decision," June 30). Get off your elite high horse and leave the people alone. Lyle Rescott, Marriottsville - To respond to this letter, send an email to talkback@baltimoresun.com . Please include your name and contact information.
Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.