Weather | Sports | Forums | Comics | Classifieds | Calendar | Movies
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to consider the constitutionality of a federal law that requires state prisons to accommodate inmate religions, from Christianity to Satanism.
The case does not question inmates' rights to practice their religions but asks whether a state must grant a request for a particular diet, special haircut or religious symbols.
Some states argue that a 2000 law intended to protect the rights of prisoners amounts to an unconstitutional government promotion of religion and makes prisons more dangerous in the process. States that receive federal money must accommodate prisoners' religious beliefs unless wardens can show that the government has a strong reason not to.
The Court will consider an appeal from Ohio inmates, described in court filings as a Wiccan witch, a Satanist, a racial separatist who is an ordained minister of the Christian Identity Church and others.
The state inmates had sued claiming they were denied access to religious literature and ceremonial items and time to worship. The Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals used the case to strike down part of the law, called the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, on grounds it violates the separation of church and state.
In other cases, the Court:
Heard arguments on whether the government can send immigrants back to countries that haven't agreed to accept them.
Agreed to consider two cases to establish guidelines for when lawsuits belong in federal or state court. One involves the family of a girl who cut her finger on a Star-Kist tuna can; the other involves gas station owners in 35 states seeking to sue Exxon Mobil in a dispute over a discount program.
Agreed to decide whether Hawaii went too far to keep gasoline affordable for residents when it imposed rent caps on dealer-run stations.
Sidestepped a dispute over whether Internet providers can be forced to identify subscribers illegally swapping music and movies online.
Declined to hear a trio of cases seeking to reinstate federal regulations that would force regional phone carriers to share their networks with competitors at discounted rates.
Refused to decide whether the Pentagon is constitutionally obligated to give news media access to U.S. troops during combat.
Refused to consider Union Pacific Railroad's appeal of a $30-million damage award to a man partially paralyzed in a railroad crossing collision.