It’s Groundhog Day, the day when Punxsutawney Phil takes a gander at his shade and decides how much more winter we’ll all have to endure.
Not a bad idea, that – and one that has some resonance for those of us who habit the world of litigation. February’s not too late for us to look at the shadows of last year’s most crucial decisions and get a sense of how the long-term legal temperature’s rising and falling on some of the major issues of our time.
So with that, a glimpse at the 2006 cases that are likely to overshadow coming events in 2007:
1) Scheidler v. National Organization of Women, Inc. (February 21) – The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that anti-abortion protesters are not liable under federal racketeering statutes.
A resounding defeat for NOW and its allies in their decades-long effort to paint the Right to Life movement as a mafia-like organization.
2) Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights (March 7) – The Supreme Court ruled that institutions which accept government funding (including state universities) cannot compel private organizations – including student religious groups – to accept as members those who disagree with the group’s viewpoint.
In other words, state schools cannot use their own non-discrimination policies to undermine students’ Constitutional freedom of assembly, or to limit select groups’ access to university facilities.
3) Hernandez v. Robles (July 6) – The New York Court of Appeals struck down an effort to judicially redefine marriage in the state, saying the issue should be left to the legislature.
This decision – one of nine similar decisions issued in a three-month period last summer – dealt a stunning blow to those pushing for government-endorsed same-sex “marriage.”
The court affirmed that the only legal basis for government involvement in marriage is to provide the best possible environment for rearing children (future citizens), and endorsed the view that this “ideal environment” is most dependably found in a stable, loving, two-gender marriage.
4) Citizens for Equal Protection v. Bruning (July 14) – In Nebraska, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit reversed a district court decision that had declared unconstitutional a state amendment preserving marriage.
The court affirmed the legal interpretations of the New York decision, and found no reason to fabricate a federal right to same-sex “marriage.”
5) Andersen v. King County (July 26) – The Washington Supreme Court declared the state’s law defining marriage as “the union of one man and one woman” constitutional, reversing two lower court decisions.