Supreme Court session opens with a whoosh, but watch out

The Supreme Court of the United States opened its new session not with the bang of a gavel but with the whoosh of a broom as it swept 1,800 cases out the door.
None of the cases that the court declined to hear was of more immediate import than the appeal filed by New Jersey Republicans over a New Jersey Supreme Court decision that allowed Democrats to replace their shady incumbent, Robert Torricelli, on the Nov. 5 ballot with a sentimental favorite, former Sen. Frank Lautenberg.
Had Lautenberg not been permitted on the ballot, the New Jersey seat now being vacated by Torricelli would have almost certain gone to Republican Douglas Forrester. With Lautenberg on the ballot, New Jersey has a horse race in a year in which New Jersey may decide whether the Democrats or the Republicans control the U.S.. Senate.
While few other cases on which the court passed had the political ramifications of the New Jersey case, a number of the cases are of import. By refusing to consider overturning lower court rulings, the Supreme Court allowed to stand an order that a deadbeat father of nine sire no more children unless he can prove an ability to support them.
The court also declined to hear an appeal of a conviction of a South Carolina tattoo artist who claimed a First Amendment right to pursue his craft. State law prohibits tattooing of any kind, except by doctors prior to surgery.
Celebrities get bounced
And the court declined to hear various appeals from celebrity plaintiffs, including Frank Sinatra Jr., who sought to keep his kidnappers of almost 40 years ago from profiting from a movie about the crime; Richard Jewell, once a suspect in the Atlanta Olympics bombing who claimed he was libeled in news reports; Ralph Nader, who wanted to be listed as a Green Party candidate on the Ohio presidential ballot, and mercy-killer Jack Kevorkian and Oklahoma City bombing conspirator Terry Nichols.
The court also declined to hear an appeal of a lower court ruling that barred Titanic salvagers from selling items recovered from the sunken vessel.
Still, this session will have its share of controversial, high-impact and potentially historic cases.
The court has accepted 45 cases for the term, and will probably hear about 80 cases before June.
There will be arguments over whether cross-burners can burn crosses, the rights of abortion protesters, three-strike laws that provide heavy penalties for repeat criminals and whether sex offenders can be labeled and advertised as predators.
Some of what will probably be the session's most contentious cases are still working their way through lower courts -- cases that involve balancing constitutional rights against security interests in the post-9/11 era.
Those cases, which will involve individual freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, have the potential to change the face of America as we know it.