JPL privacy lawsuit fails at Supreme Court

A unanimous U.S. Supreme Court upheld the federal government's right to conduct extensive background checks on contract employees, rejecting a suit brought by employees at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in La Canada-Flintridge that said the checks violated privacy rights.

The Washington Post has the story here.

Digression: I once had the pleasure of interviewing the lead plaintiff in the case, JPL image analyst Robert Nelson, about his Quixotic effort to get national media attention for his analysis of Bush's infamous bulge (the one on his back in his 2004 debate with John Kerry. Here's a Salon story for reference). My article got spiked, and then erased from the computer system, by former San Gabriel Valley Tribune executive editor Tal Campbell for being too political. Memories.

Four in the morning

1. You might want to curb your sexting while at work, thanks to a unanimous ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court. LAT

2. Get to know the semantic web - before it gets to know you. Nieman Journalism Lab

3. Faced with a lagging number of contributors, Wikipedia plans to change protocals for editing "sensitive" articles. NetworkWorld

4. The L.A. Press Club bets on celebrities. fishbowlLA

Four in the morning

1. Wisconsin is set to pass a journalists' shield law. State Journal

2. "Revenue promiscuity" is the new buzz phrase for investigative journalism - but doesn't the number of partners you have, as in other types of promiscuous behavior, increase the risk of something going wrong? Nieman Journalism Lab

3. The Supreme Court overturns a law banning animal cruelty videos on free speech grounds. Wa Po

4. Forbes makes an offer many people can and should refuse. Gawker

The floodgates open

The U.S. Supreme Court today ruled that corporations are free to spend their money to support political candidates and campaigns.

Blind justice

The U.S. Supreme Court voted 5-4 today to indefinitely block cameras from California's Prop. 8 trial, overturning the trial judge's order to allow a limited broadcast of the proceedings. The court's conservatives voted in the majority. LAT

Our opaque justice system

The U.S. Supreme Court has overturned an order in the Prop. 8 trial that would have allowed the proceedings to be streamed to other federal court houses in the state and posted on YouTube.

The case, which got underway today, aims to overturn California's ban against gay marriage on constitutional grounds. After the federal judge in the case agreed to a limited broadcast of the proceedings, opponents of gay marriage filed an appeal to the Supreme Court, arguing that they could be subject to harassment from gay-marriage proponents. The Supreme Court's temporary restriction will remain in effect until Wednesday.

The Los Angeles Times reports that Justice David Souter offered the only dissent, saying there was insufficient evidence that broadcasting the trial would cause "irreparable harm" to supporters of Prop. 8.

Can one argue a law is constitutional and then claim the public is too unruly to hear that argument?

Liveblogging at the Daily Journal

As the Senate hearings for Supreme Court-nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor get underway Monday, Los Angeles Daily Journal reporter Lawrence Hurley will be in the hearing room liveblogging from start to finish. This might be a first for the legal newspaper. The blog updates will remain behind DJ's paywall, however.

Obama selects Supreme

President Barack Obama today nominated federal appeals judge Sonia Sotomayor, 54, to replace Justice David Souter on the U.S. Supreme Court. Sotomayor would be the first Latino ever to sit on the court. and her selection would double the number of women serving. NYT, WaPo, LAT, WSJ

Supreme Court still disturbed by 2004 nipple sighting

The U.S. Supreme Court has ordered a federal appellate court to consider reinstating a $550,000 fine imposed on CBS after singer Janet Jackson bared her breast for 9/16ths of a second during the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show. From AP:

Last year, the appeals court threw out the fine against CBS, saying the FCC strayed from its long-held approach of applying identical standards to words and images when reviewing complaints of indecency.

The appellate court said the incident lasted nine-sixteenths of one second and should have been regarded as ''fleeting.'' The FCC previously deviated from its nearly 30-year practice of fining indecent broadcast programming only when it was so ''pervasive as to amount to 'shock treatment' for the audience,'' the court said.

Last week the Supreme Court ruled the FCC has the right to impose hefty fines to keep the public airwaves clean.

Justice Souter to retire

Supreme Court Justice David Souter today announced plans to retire at the end of the current term. NPR