Supreme Court Limits Schools on Race

Legal News Center

[##_1L|1304487309.jpg|width="131" height="91" alt=""|_##]The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected school assignment plans that take account of students' race in two major public school districts. The decisions could imperil similar plans nationwide. The Court also blocked the execution of a Texas killer whose lawyers argued that he should not be put to death because he is mentally ill.

Thursday is probably the Court's last session until October. The school rulings in cases affecting schools in Louisville, Ky., and Seattle leave public school systems with a limited arsenal to maintain racial diversity.

The court split, 5-4, with Chief Justice John Roberts announcing the court's judgment. Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a dissent that was joined by the court's other three liberals.

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote a concurring opinion in which he said race may be a component of school district plans designed to achieve diversity.

He agreed with Roberts that the plans in Louisville and Seattle went too far. He said, however, that to the extent that Roberts' opinion could be interpreted as foreclosing the use of race in any circumstance, "I disagree with that reasoning."

The two school systems in Thursday's decisions employ slightly different methods of taking students' race into account when determining which school they would attend.

In the case involving the mentally ill killer in Texas, the court ruled 5-4 in the case of Scott Louis Panetti, who shot his in-laws to death 15 years ago in front of his wife and young daughter.

The convicted murderer says that he suffers from a severe documented illness that is the source of gross delusions. "This argument, we hold, should have been considered," said Justice Anthony Kennedy, who wrote the majority opinion.

Panetti's lawyers wanted the court to determine that people who cannot understand the connection between their crime and punishment because of mental illness may not be executed.

The Eighth Amendment of the Constitution bars "the execution of a person who is so lacking in rational understanding that he cannot comprehend that he is being put to death because of the crime he was convicted of committing," they said in court papers.

In a third case, the Court abandoned a 96-year-old ban on manufacturers and retailers setting price floors for products. In a 5-4 decision, the court said that agreements on minimum prices are legal if they promote competition.

The ruling means that accusations of minimum pricing pacts will be evaluated case by case. The Supreme Court declared in 1911 that minimum pricing agreements violate federal antitrust law.

Related listings

  • High court allows price-fixing by manufacturers

    High court allows price-fixing by manufacturers

    Legal News Center 06/29/2007

    [##_1L|1117795531.jpg|width="180" height="122" alt=""|_##]Manufacturers may set a fixed price for their products and forbid retailers from offering discounts, the Supreme Court said yesterday, overturning a nearly century-old rule of antitrust law th...

  • Supreme Court blocks Texas man's execution

    Supreme Court blocks Texas man's execution

    Legal News Center 06/28/2007

    [##_1L|1258421544.jpg|width="120" height="101" alt=""|_##]The Supreme Court blocked the execution Thursday of a mentally ill Texas man whose lawyers say he is too delusional to understand the legal process. Scott Panetti, a paranoid schizophrenic, sh...

  • Lawyer sues for defamation in corruption case

    Lawyer sues for defamation in corruption case

    Legal News Center 06/27/2007

    [##_1L|1101031443.jpg|width="120" height="138" alt=""|_##]An El Paso lawyer has filed a defamation suit against a former county employee who has pleaded guilty in an ongoing federal corruption scandal. Martie Jobe claims in a suit filed Monday that s...

New York Commercial Litigation Law Firm - Woods Lonergan PLLC

Founded in 1993 by Managing Partner James F. Woods, Woods Lonergan PLLC has built a strong reputation as a resourceful and industrious firm that provides clients with clear, concise, and straightforward answers to their most challenging legal issues. Partner Lawrence R. Lonergan, who joined the firm in 2008, has been a friend and colleague to Mr. Woods for over 40 years and shares the same business philosophy. Woods Lonergan PLLC’s collective experience and expertise enables the firm to expeditiously and effectively analyze the increasing challenges clients face in an evolving business and legal world, in many instances, avoiding unnecessary time and expense to our clients. Our mission is simple: provide cutting-edge expertise and sound advice in select areas of the law for corporate and business clients. We thrive on providing each client with personalized attention, forceful representation, and a collaborative team effort that embraces collective knowledge.

Business News

New York & New Jersey Family Law Matters We represent our clients in all types of proceedings that include termination of parental rights. >> read