What cases will the Supreme Court examine in new term?

The Supreme Court begins its new term on Monday. It will look at some noteworthy issues, including affirmative action and Juvenile life without parole. 

J. Scott Applewhite/AP/File
In this Oct. 14, 2014, file photo, people walk outside the Supreme Court in Washington. The Supreme Court is starting a new term on Oct. 5, 2015, that promises a steady stream of divisive social issues, and also brighter prospects for conservatives who suffered more losses than usual in recent months.

Some noteworthy cases the Supreme Court will hear in its new term that begins Monday:

—Affirmative action: In a case being heard for the second time, a white Texan who was rejected by the University of Texas is challenging the school's use of race among a range of factors in filling roughly one-quarter of incoming freshman classes. (Most slots are given to Texans who graduate in the top 10 percent or so of their high-school classes.)

—Union fees: Labor unions representing government workers square off with opponents over whether the unions can collect mandatory fees from those who choose not to join. Unions argue they should be able to collect fees since all workers benefit from collective bargaining between the unions and governments.

—One person, one vote: Two cases explore how states draw legislative districts to comply with the constitutional requirement of equal representation. A Texas case tests whether states must count all people, or just eligible voters, in drawing electoral districts, pitting rural communities against urban areas where immigrants who are ineligible to vote tend to congregate. An Arizona case could turn on whether the justices conclude that an independent redistricting commission showed a partisan preference in drawing electoral boundaries.

—Juvenile life without parole: A Louisiana inmate in prison since 1963 wants the justices to rule that their 2012 decision outlawing mandatory life sentences with no chance of release for young killers also should apply to past cases.

—Disqualifying black potential jurors: A black death-row inmate from Georgia says notes from the prosecutor show he excluded all four black potential jurors and purposely seated an all-white jury in this case.

—Judicially imposed death sentence: Another death penalty case, this one from Florida, questions whether judges, rather than juries, can impose a death sentence, especially when the jury is not unanimous in recommending death.

—Class-action lawsuits: Business interests are hoping the court will use two cases to further rein in costly class-action lawsuits. In one of the cases, Tyson Foods Inc. wants the justices to overturn a $5.8 million judgment for failing to pay 3,000 employees at a pork processing plant for time they spend putting on and taking off gear to protect them from sharp knives.

—Consumer protections: Internet search engine Spokeo is trying to stop a lawsuit over inaccurate information it published about a Virginia man, arguing that the errors were flattering or, at worst, harmless.

—Electricity pricing: The Obama administration is defending a regulation that makes utilities pay consumers who use less energy during times of peak demand. Environmental groups call it a low-cost way to reduce pollution. But a lower court sided with the utility industry and ruled that the practice intrudes on state power over retail customers.

—Veterans contracts: A Virginia company owned by a disabled Army veteran claims the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs is not doing enough to comply with a federal law aimed at increasing the number of government contracts awarded to small businesses owned by disabled veterans.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.