Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsJustice Anthony M Kennedy
IN THE NEWS

Justice Anthony M Kennedy

FEATURED ARTICLES
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
June 29, 1989
Having devoted a good portion of my youth to a First Amendment defense of flag desecration (Ohio vs. Liska, 1970), I read with mixed emotions of the Supreme Court's decision in Texas vs. Johnson. While I agree with Justice Anthony M. Kennedy's labeling the outcome and, presumably, defendant Johnson's act, as "distasteful," I applaud his being compelled by the "pure command of the Constitution" to uphold the defendant's right of free expression. Having once been stripped of that right (the Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's decision in my case)
ARTICLES BY DATE
OPINION
December 9, 2012 | By Michael Klarman
On Nov. 6, for the first time in American history, a majority of voters in a state - indeed, in three states - approved same-sex marriage. On Friday, the Supreme Court decided to weigh in on the issue, granting review in cases challenging the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act and in a case contesting the constitutionality of California's Proposition 8, which barred same-sex marriage. DOMA is likely to prove the easier issue for the court, assuming the justices rule on the merits of either or both cases (there are procedural issues that, depending on how the justices are inclined, could block them from considering the merits)
Advertisement
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
June 28, 1999
The implications of the Supreme Court decision that now creates protected "state sovereign immunity" are staggering (June 24). Future decisions predicated on this specious precedent could gut the federal Civil Rights Act, federal environmental regulations, age discrimination legislation or, frankly, any federal legislation passed that state governments find not to their liking. This, then, is the great legacy of the Reagan-Bush years and their Supreme Court appointees; that 140 years after the Civil War seemed to have resolved the issue of states' rights in favor of the United States, and not a collection of united states, the South actually did win the war. What is really breathtaking is the hypocrisy of conservative Justice Anthony M. Kennedy.
NATIONAL
July 7, 2012 | By David G. Savage
Washington Bureau WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court had more than its share of surprising opinions and unexpected rulings this year beyond the pair of victories for the Obama administration in the healthcare and immigration cases. The justices ruled for the criminal defendants in this term's most important cases on crime and punishment. That alone is a rarity for a court that more often leans to the right. Overall, however, the decisions this year did not reflect a true ideological shift at the high court.
BUSINESS
May 15, 1989 | From Associated Press
The Supreme Court ruled today that disputes between investors who allege fraud and their brokers must be resolved by arbitration, not in court suits. By a 5-4 vote, the justices overturned a 1953 high court decision that permitted lawsuits under an anti-fraud provision of the Securities Act of 1933. In its history, the high court has reversed itself fewer than 200 times. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the court, said the 1953 decision "has fallen far out of step with our current strong endorsement" of federal laws that favor arbitration.
OPINION
June 3, 2010
As viewers of "Law & Order" know, criminal suspects in custody must be advised of their right to remain silent. But after a Michigan man exercised that right by refusing to talk to police for nearly three hours, his interrogators asked him if he had asked God for forgiveness for shooting another man to death. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court ruled 5 to 4 that his one-word answer — "Yes" — was admissible because he hadn't explicitly invoked his right to silence to stop the police questioning.
NATIONAL
August 9, 2009 | David G. Savage
Sonia Sotomayor became the 111th Supreme Court justice in the nation's history today, taking an oath to "administer justice without respect to persons and do equal right to the poor and to the rich." Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. administered the oath in a ceremonial conference room at the Supreme Court before a small gathering of Sotomayor's family and friends, and a handful of White House aides who had worked on her confirmation. Roberts said the special swearing-in was arranged for a quiet morning so that Sotomayor could "begin her work as an associate justice without delay."
NEWS
May 19, 1989 | DAVID G. SAVAGE, Times Staff Writer
The Supreme Court said Thursday that a 15-year-old Florida girl may go ahead with plans to end her pregnancy as it lifted an order imposed two days ago by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy that had blocked her abortion. The decision not to intervene in the case ended a brief but curious episode, one that raised intriguing questions about Kennedy, the newest justice on the court. The episode was unusual because the case--involving a teen-ager identified only as T. W. and a Florida law regulating abortions for minors--is still pending in the state court.
NATIONAL
January 24, 2010 | By David G. Savage
Five years ago, when John G. Roberts Jr. became the Supreme Court's chief justice, he described the job as though he would be a minor functionary, more like an umpire behind the plate than the star of the game. He also said he favored minimal and narrow decisions, rather than broad but divisive rulings that would abruptly change the law. But in recent weeks, Roberts has shown that when he has the support of moderate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, he is willing to move boldly on behalf of conservative causes.
NATIONAL
July 7, 2012 | By David G. Savage
Washington Bureau WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court had more than its share of surprising opinions and unexpected rulings this year beyond the pair of victories for the Obama administration in the healthcare and immigration cases. The justices ruled for the criminal defendants in this term's most important cases on crime and punishment. That alone is a rarity for a court that more often leans to the right. Overall, however, the decisions this year did not reflect a true ideological shift at the high court.
NATIONAL
December 9, 2010 | By David G. Savage, Tribune Washington Bureau
The Supreme Court's showdown over whether states can aggressively enforce laws against illegal immigrants may have ended in a draw Wednesday. If so, Arizona's 3-year-old law that cracks down on employers who knowingly hire illegal workers will stand. It could serve as a model for other states and cities that seek to adopt stricter enforcement measures. But if Justice Anthony M. Kennedy joins with his more liberal colleagues, as he did for part of Wednesday's argument, it could signal trouble in the future for other laws targeting illegal immigrants.
OPINION
June 3, 2010
As viewers of "Law & Order" know, criminal suspects in custody must be advised of their right to remain silent. But after a Michigan man exercised that right by refusing to talk to police for nearly three hours, his interrogators asked him if he had asked God for forgiveness for shooting another man to death. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court ruled 5 to 4 that his one-word answer — "Yes" — was admissible because he hadn't explicitly invoked his right to silence to stop the police questioning.
NATIONAL
February 9, 2010 | By David G. Savage
The Supreme Court's ruling last month giving corporations the right to spend freely on elections reflects a profound shift among the conservative justices on the importance of the 1st Amendment and the nature of corporations. In the 1970s, Justices William H. Rehnquist and Byron R. White said business corporations were "creatures of the law," capable of amassing wealth but due none of the rights of voters. By contrast, the court's current majority described a corporation as an "association of citizens" that deserves the same free-speech rights as an individual.
NATIONAL
January 24, 2010 | By David G. Savage
Five years ago, when John G. Roberts Jr. became the Supreme Court's chief justice, he described the job as though he would be a minor functionary, more like an umpire behind the plate than the star of the game. He also said he favored minimal and narrow decisions, rather than broad but divisive rulings that would abruptly change the law. But in recent weeks, Roberts has shown that when he has the support of moderate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, he is willing to move boldly on behalf of conservative causes.
NATIONAL
August 9, 2009 | David G. Savage
Sonia Sotomayor became the 111th Supreme Court justice in the nation's history today, taking an oath to "administer justice without respect to persons and do equal right to the poor and to the rich." Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. administered the oath in a ceremonial conference room at the Supreme Court before a small gathering of Sotomayor's family and friends, and a handful of White House aides who had worked on her confirmation. Roberts said the special swearing-in was arranged for a quiet morning so that Sotomayor could "begin her work as an associate justice without delay."
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
June 28, 1999
The implications of the Supreme Court decision that now creates protected "state sovereign immunity" are staggering (June 24). Future decisions predicated on this specious precedent could gut the federal Civil Rights Act, federal environmental regulations, age discrimination legislation or, frankly, any federal legislation passed that state governments find not to their liking. This, then, is the great legacy of the Reagan-Bush years and their Supreme Court appointees; that 140 years after the Civil War seemed to have resolved the issue of states' rights in favor of the United States, and not a collection of united states, the South actually did win the war. What is really breathtaking is the hypocrisy of conservative Justice Anthony M. Kennedy.
NATIONAL
February 9, 2010 | By David G. Savage
The Supreme Court's ruling last month giving corporations the right to spend freely on elections reflects a profound shift among the conservative justices on the importance of the 1st Amendment and the nature of corporations. In the 1970s, Justices William H. Rehnquist and Byron R. White said business corporations were "creatures of the law," capable of amassing wealth but due none of the rights of voters. By contrast, the court's current majority described a corporation as an "association of citizens" that deserves the same free-speech rights as an individual.
NEWS
June 11, 1989 | DAVID G. SAVAGE, Times Staff Writer
Two summers ago, civil rights activists and liberal legal groups carried out an unprecedented national campaign to defeat conservative Supreme Court nominee Robert H. Bork. They won, or so they thought. Now it appears they won a skirmish, but lost the battle. Bork's spot was filled instead by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who in his first full year on the high court has proven to be quiet, steady and consistently conservative--perhaps more so even than Bork. Thanks to Kennedy, former President Ronald Reagan and his attorney general, Edwin Meese III, gained what they wanted all along: a five-member conservative majority that can roll back the liberal high court rulings of the 1960s and 1970s.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
June 29, 1989
Having devoted a good portion of my youth to a First Amendment defense of flag desecration (Ohio vs. Liska, 1970), I read with mixed emotions of the Supreme Court's decision in Texas vs. Johnson. While I agree with Justice Anthony M. Kennedy's labeling the outcome and, presumably, defendant Johnson's act, as "distasteful," I applaud his being compelled by the "pure command of the Constitution" to uphold the defendant's right of free expression. Having once been stripped of that right (the Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's decision in my case)
NEWS
June 11, 1989 | DAVID G. SAVAGE, Times Staff Writer
Two summers ago, civil rights activists and liberal legal groups carried out an unprecedented national campaign to defeat conservative Supreme Court nominee Robert H. Bork. They won, or so they thought. Now it appears they won a skirmish, but lost the battle. Bork's spot was filled instead by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who in his first full year on the high court has proven to be quiet, steady and consistently conservative--perhaps more so even than Bork. Thanks to Kennedy, former President Ronald Reagan and his attorney general, Edwin Meese III, gained what they wanted all along: a five-member conservative majority that can roll back the liberal high court rulings of the 1960s and 1970s.
Los Angeles Times Articles
|