WASHINGTON – On civil rights and campaign cash, the Supreme Court earned an "incomplete" grade in the term that just ended. There is a good chance the court will have a new member but the same right-of-center tilt when the justices return in late summer to deal with unfinished business.
The court suggested this week, but did not conclusively resolve, that it will be a conservative bulwark against both government and private efforts to promote diversity. Even parts of such iconic laws as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 could face a rocky road in the years ahead.
So could federal and state laws that seek to curtail the influence of money in elections.
The court's action Monday in a campaign finance case strongly hinted that its conservatives will be able to overturn longstanding limits on corporate and union money in federal elections. The justices scheduled a new round of arguments for Sept. 9 in a case they first heard in March concerning whether a movie critical of Hillary Rodham Clinton's candidacy for president should be regulated as a campaign ad.
By that time, President Barack Obama hopes the Senate will have confirmed his high court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, so that she can take part in the case, although her vote is not likely to affect the outcome. Sotomayor was named to replace retiring Justice David Souter, and her votes would be expected to track his in many cases.
The justices decided 75 cases in the term that began last October, including 22 by 5-4 votes and 12 more in which the votes were 6-3. Many of those 5-4 decisions, like Monday's ruling finding that white firefighters in Connecticut suffered discrimination on the basis of race, came out in the usual conservative-liberal alignment.
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority opinion that held that voluntary efforts by governments and private employers to promote diversity can be vulnerable to reverse discrimination claims.
In several big, contentious cases, the court unexpectedly reached consensus by ruling very narrowly. The voting rights decision was one such example.
Eight justices signed onto an opinion that left intact a key component of the landmark civil rights law but also acknowledged that its continued existence poses "a difficult constitutional question" that they chose not to answer this time around.
But in expressing concern about aspects of the law, and Congress' actions in renewing it in 2006, the court laid down a marker that could lead to a "later decision invalidating the statute if it is not amended," said Tom Goldstein, a Washington lawyer who follows the court closely.
Similarly, Justice Antonin Scalia, in a separate opinion in the firefighters case, predicted that the court soon would have to wrestle with whether a portion of the 1964 civil rights law is at odds with the Constitution. The court avoided the constitutional issue in Monday's decision.
More generally, this term's divided rulings demonstrated once more that the law is whatever Kennedy — a moderate conservative — says it is.
Two cases illustrate Kennedy's influence as the man in the middle on the nine-member court.
In a dispute over judicial ethics, the issue was whether the Constitution requires a judge to step aside from a case when one party has contributed significantly to his election. In a DNA case, a convict was seeking the right to test evidence that would conclusively demonstrate his guilt or innocence.
Kennedy sided with the liberals in the judicial matter, saying elected judges cannot take part in cases when large campaign contributions from interested parties create the appearance of bias.
"Just as no man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, similar fears of bias can arise when — without the consent of the other parties — a man chooses the judge in his own cause," Kennedy said for the court.
Chief Justice John Roberts dissented, saying states should be allowed to make their own rules.
Roberts made essentially the same argument in the DNA case, refusing to grant defendants a constitutional right to test the evidence. And this time he had Kennedy's vote.

"There are a lot of these issues where Justice Kennedy's vote is absolutely critical," said Paul Clement, a lawyer with the Atlanta-based King & Spalding firm and a former solicitor general in the George W. Bush administration.

Another important area is executive authority, particularly concerning the power to detain terrorism suspects. There, the liberals, with Kennedy on their side, have held sway.

That is one reason, perhaps the main reason, the Obama administration moved terror suspect Ali al-Marri into the civilian criminal justice system after he had been held without charges for more than five years in a Navy brig. The court had agreed to hear al-Marri's case and the administration risked seeing the court imposing limits on presidential power.

This term, the justices also ruled against efforts by business interests to block state lawsuits and investigations by invoking federal laws and regulations. In two cases, the court ruled in favor of plaintiffs in civil lawsuits, including a woman who lost her arm as a result of a botched injection, and state attorneys general who wanted to investigate potential discrimination in lending by national banks.

In the latter case, Scalia joined with the liberal justices to form an unusual majority. The same alignment also prevailed in a case limiting searches of suspects' automobiles without warrants.

In more mundane cases with significant consequences to the legal system, the court's conservatives limited access to courthouses by making it harder for plaintiffs to file and win civil lawsuits. Those decisions went against environmentalists and a Pakistani Muslim man who sought to hold FBI director Robert Mueller and former Attorney General John Ashcroft to account for the harsh conditions of his detention in a federal jail cell following the Sept. 11 attacks.

NEW YORK – Bernard Madoff, even as he faces the prospect of dying behind bars for his epic swindle, has never wavered on one point: He acted alone.
Federal investigators haven't budged either: They don't believe him.
The day after Madoff was given a 150-year term, a person close to the investigation said Tuesday the sentencing marked "the end of the beginning" of a far-reaching investigation expected to answer lingering questions about how the disgraced financier pulled off perhaps the largest financial fraud history — and who helped him.
The person, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing, told The Associated Press on Monday that prosecutors expect to charge at least 10 more people in connection with the scheme. The person said Tuesday that no arrests were imminent.
The U.S. attorney's office refused to comment on the status of the investigation or potential suspects.
Madoff, 71, pleaded guilty in March to charges that his secretive investment advisory business was a multibillion-dollar Ponzi scheme that wiped out thousands of investors and ruined charities.
Madoff admitted his own crimes, but has claimed members of his inner circle — including a brother and two sons who ran a brokerage operation under the same roof as his firm — were innocent bystanders. Lawyers for the family have vehemently denied any wrongdoing.
"How do you excuse deceiving 200 employees who have spent most of their working life working for me?" Madoff said at sentencing. "How do you excuse lying to your brother and two sons who spent their whole adult life helping to build a successful and respectful business?"
Ruth Madoff broke her silence Tuesday to suggest she was among the victims of Madoff's deceit. Her husband, she said in a statement, "stunned us all with his confession and is responsible for this terrible situation in which so many now find themselves."
But in the six months since the former Nasdaq chairman's arrest, the family has not escaped intense scrutiny by federal authorities and a court-appointed trustee overseeing liquidation of Madoff's assets. A judge's forfeiture order has stripped Ruth Madoff of $80 million in assets, including a penthouse apartment where she still lives.
Besides the family, there have been questions about the role of Frank DiPascali, chief financial officer of Madoff's money management business, and that of several large money managers who funneled billions of dollars of investments to the firm. The trustee, Irving Picard, has filed lawsuits against the managers, accusing them of being Madoff cronies who either knew, or should have known, about the fraud.
Former prosecutors said Madoff's sentencing wasn't a grand finale.
"Once the primary wrongdoer has been sentenced, it typically is a fact that will take the wind out of the sails of an investigation," said William Devaney, a former federal prosecutor now in private practice. "However, this is an atypical investigation."
Another former federal prosecutor, Christopher J. Steskal, said that heedlessly benefiting from the fraud wasn't enough to bring a criminal case against a potential suspect. Investigators need convincing proof that the person had criminal intent and participated in the scheme. It's likely authorities are cultivating cooperators to provide that proof, he said.
"If you're under investigation, you have two options: You either dig a foxhole and hide in it, or you conclude that you have no option except to try to earn points by cooperating," said Steskal, who's now in private practice in New York.
The list of possible cooperators include DiPascali, who reportedly has given investigators evidence against the so-called feeder fund managers. Also, an accountant charged as the only other defendant so far has signaled in court papers that he wants to negotiate a plea deal. Their attorneys have declined to comment.
Federal authorities also have spoken to several clerks who handled some of the voluminous paperwork Madoff admits he fabricated, including tens of thousands of fake account statements.
One of Madoff's burned clients, Phyllis Feiner of Great Neck, N.Y., said Tuesday that she looks forward to more arrests.

"I would like to see everybody else who was involved in this evil scheme to be brought to justice," she said. "There's absolutely no way he could have done this all by himself."

WASHINGTON – A former CIA station chief charged with raping an unconscious Algerian woman last year surrendered to federal agents on Tuesday.
Andrew Warren, 41, was fired from the CIA earlier this year, according to agency spokesman George Little.
A grand jury issued a one-count indictment against Warren on June 18 that was unsealed on Tuesday. If convicted he faces up to life in prison, according the Justice Department.
Two Algerian women came forward separately in 2008 to say they had been sexually assaulted by Warren while at his home in Algiers, according to papers filed in federal court in January by a State Department investigator.
One of the Algerian women claimed that she was drinking at a party at Warren's home when something made her ill and she passed out, according to the State Department investigation. She awoke believing she had had intercourse, but with no memory of having done so.
The indictment says the alleged victim was not conscious at the time of the Feb. 18, 2008, assault.
Warren had been assigned to Algiers since 2007. He was removed in October.
The CIA station chief is the most senior intelligence officer in the country, overseeing operations and advising the ambassador.
The CIA would not confirm Warren's title. However, congressional and intelligence officials say he was the station chief. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to disclose the information.

BEIJING (Reuters) –
What do Johnny Depp, Garfield, Paris Hilton and roast pork have in common? In China, the answer is that a new government-mandated Internet filter rates some pictures of all four of them as bad for your moral health.

Beijing has ordered all personal computers sold in China from July 1 to be preinstalled with the Green Dam software, which it says is designed to block pornographic and violent images, and which critics fear will be used to extend censorship.

But a trial of the programme, which is available online for free download (http://www.skycn.com/soft/46657.html), suggested

its filters may be of limited use to worried parents.

When the software is installed, and an image scanner activated, it blocks even harmless images of a film poster for cartoon cat Garfield, dishes of flesh-colour cooked pork and on one search engine a close-up of film star Johnny Depp's face.

With the image filter off, even though searches with words like "nude" are blocked, a hunt for adult websites throws up links to soft and hardcore pornography sites including one with a video of full penetrative sex playing on its front page.

Green Dam has not detailed how it scans images for obscene content, but computer experts have said it likely uses colour and form recognition to zoom in on potential expanses of naked flesh.

Programme settings allow users to chose how tightly they want images scanned. When too much skin is detected, Green Dam closes all internet browsers with no warning, sometimes flashing up a notice that the viewer is looking at "harmful" content.

But the interpretation of obscene is apparently generous enough to include the orange hue of Garfield's fur and, on the highest security settings, prevent viewers clicking through to any illustrated story on one English language news website.

A programme to scan written content appears less sensitive, with a string of explicit words typed into a word document triggering no response, although some users have complained in online forums of shut-downs similar to those of web browsers.

SEX OR POLITICS?

The software also allows users to choose what they want to filter for, and besides adult websites and violence, categories include "gay" and "illegal activities."

Gay and health activists fear the blanket ban on "gay content," in a country where homosexuality is not criminalised, could damage projects including sexual health and AIDS education.

And government critics worry the "illegal activities" section will cover political and social activities Beijing objects to, tightening access to non-approved information, already filtered by censors and a firewall.

Another setting allows Green Dam to take regular snapshots of a user's screen and store them for up to two weeks -- ostensibly so parents can monitor computer use by minors.

But it could also potentially leave security officials a track of computer use by a suspected dissident, or be a gift to fraudsters hunting online bank details and private information.

Researchers in the U.S. have already said they are concerned Green Dam leaves users vulnerable to malicious sites that might steal personal data or install code on the personal computer.

Western governments and trade groups have also asked China to reconsider, based on concerns ranging from cyber-security and performance of the software to Internet freedoms.

"People say the software is not very stable and has many technological problems," said Joerg Wuttke, the president of the European Union Chamber of Commerce in China, which has dubbed the introduction of Green Dam "hasty."

China's foreign ministry on Tuesday declined to respond to criticisms of the software.

(Additional reporting by Maxim Duncan, Kirby Chien and Alan Wheatley; Editing by Jerry Norton)