Following ruling barring Ten Commandments displays in courthouses, Supreme Court rules such displays are allowed at state capitols. Details soon.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Supreme Court bars Ten Commandments at courthouses
Monday, June 27, 2005; Posted: 10:29 a.m. EDT (14:29 GMT)
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A split Supreme Court struck down Ten Commandments displays in courthouses Monday, ruling that two exhibits in Kentucky cross the line between separation of church and state because they promote a religious message.
The court's decision was 5-4, with Justice Sandra Day O'Connor casting the swing vote.
The decision was the first of two seeking to mediate the bitter culture war over religion's place in public life. In it, the court declined to prohibit all displays in court buildings or on government property.
Justices left legal wiggle room, saying that some displays -- like their own courtroom frieze -- would be permissible if they're portrayed neutrally in order to honor the nation's legal history.
But framed copies in two Kentucky courthouses went too far in endorsing religion, the court held.
Other cases
Also Monday, the Supreme Court rejected appeals from two journalists who have refused to testify before a grand jury about the leak of an undercover CIA officer's identity.
The cases asked the court to revisit an issue that it last dealt with more than 30 years ago -- whether reporters can be jailed or fined for refusing to identify their sources.
The justices' intervention had been sought by 34 states and many news groups, all arguing that confidentiality is important in news gathering.
"Important information will be lost to the public if journalists cannot reliably promise anonymity to sources," news organizations including The Associated Press told justices in court papers.
Time magazine's Matthew Cooper and The New York Times' Judith Miller, who filed the appeals, face up to 18 months in jail for refusing to reveal sources as part of an investigation into who divulged the name of CIA officer Valerie Plame.
The Supreme Court also Monday overturned a ruling that required cable operators to open up their high-speed Internet lines to rivals. (Full story)
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Supreme Court bars Ten Commandments at courthouses
Monday, June 27, 2005; Posted: 10:29 a.m. EDT (14:29 GMT)
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A split Supreme Court struck down Ten Commandments displays in courthouses Monday, ruling that two exhibits in Kentucky cross the line between separation of church and state because they promote a religious message.
The court's decision was 5-4, with Justice Sandra Day O'Connor casting the swing vote.
The decision was the first of two seeking to mediate the bitter culture war over religion's place in public life. In it, the court declined to prohibit all displays in court buildings or on government property.
Justices left legal wiggle room, saying that some displays -- like their own courtroom frieze -- would be permissible if they're portrayed neutrally in order to honor the nation's legal history.
But framed copies in two Kentucky courthouses went too far in endorsing religion, the court held.
Other cases
Also Monday, the Supreme Court rejected appeals from two journalists who have refused to testify before a grand jury about the leak of an undercover CIA officer's identity.
The cases asked the court to revisit an issue that it last dealt with more than 30 years ago -- whether reporters can be jailed or fined for refusing to identify their sources.
The justices' intervention had been sought by 34 states and many news groups, all arguing that confidentiality is important in news gathering.
"Important information will be lost to the public if journalists cannot reliably promise anonymity to sources," news organizations including The Associated Press told justices in court papers.
Time magazine's Matthew Cooper and The New York Times' Judith Miller, who filed the appeals, face up to 18 months in jail for refusing to reveal sources as part of an investigation into who divulged the name of CIA officer Valerie Plame.
The Supreme Court also Monday overturned a ruling that required cable operators to open up their high-speed Internet lines to rivals. (Full story)
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.