CHURCH-STATE, DEATH PENALTY AND DISABILITY CASES DOMINATE SUPREME COURT'S YEAR

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court, in the term that ended last week, narrowed
protections for people with disabilities and raised soul-searching concerns
about the death penalty.

And in the last decision of the 2001-2002 court term, the justices declared
that state aid for parochial school tuition can be constitutional under the
right circumstances -- a ruling that fundamentally remaps the boundary of
church and state.

Like 20 other cases this term, the voucher case was decided by the barest
5-4 majority. That continues a trend and reflects an ideologically
polarized court, with its conservative bloc often holding sway. The split
is most profound on issues such as church and state and states' rights,
said Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe.

"In both of these areas, however, the 5-4 split within the court has become
even more firmly entrenched, with the dissenters making clear that they
disagree so profoundly with the majority that they would seize the first
opportunity to overturn the leading precedents in both realms," he said.

The voucher case, like the greatest share of the other 5-4 cases, included
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and four others in the majority, and the
four relative liberals in dissent.

The court did decide 24 of its 79 cases unanimously. Traditionally, this
has been the goal of the court because, lawyers and many justices say, it
fosters confidence in the judiciary.

As often happens, many major rulings came at or near the close of the term.
Also on the last day, the court allowed the broadest drug testing yet for
public school students, saying a school's interest in riding itself of
drugs outweighs student privacy rights.

On capital punishment, though, it seemed to be a time of soul-searching.

In a week's time, the justices delivered two rulings that will remove
inmates from death row. The court reversed an earlier ruling to declare
that executing mentally retarded people is unconstitutionally cruel. It
also held that only juries, not judges, can be the final arbiters of life
or death in a murder case.

"The opinions of the last week show a court that is much more willing than
in the past to intensely scrutinize the fairness of the ways in which the
death penalty is being administered," said Lawrence Marshall, director of
the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University's law school.

The court has taken another significant death penalty case for the term
that begins in the fall -- one dealing with rules for presenting newfound
evidence late in the appeals process. Like those the court heard this year,
this case does not attack the fundamental constitutionality of the death
penalty for the general population.

Earlier this year, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor predicted the term would be
remembered for the large number of cases arising from the Americans With
Disabilities Act. In five ADA-related cases, the court ruled to limit the
reach of the law.

"The court tightened the screws still further on the definition of
disability --who gets in the door to file these suits in the first place,"
said Evan Tager, a Washington lawyer who represents businesses.

In what many lawyers called a sign of things to come, the court heard two
cases dealing with computers, children and pornography. In the more notable
ruling, it struck down key elements of a law intended as a bulwark against
computer technology that allowed pornographers to simulate child sex
without using actual children.

The court said the law unconstitutionally limited free speech because it
also swept up scenes in mainstream movies or other art, in which youthful
sex is pantomimed or is filmed using adults disguised as children.

The justices were forced in late October to evacuate the court's
neoclassical building because anthrax was discovered in the mailroom.