Justices Defy Easy Label This Term : Individuals Show Gain in High Court Rulings

Last year at this time, as the Supreme Court concluded its 1983-84 term, civil libertarians and other critics widely deplored what seemed to be a sharp turn to the right by the justices as they ruled for the state over the individual in case after case.

This year, however, that trend came to an abrupt halt as the court, in the term that ended Tuesday, upheld individual constitutional claims in a surprising number of cases.

The court reaffirmed the separation of church and state, barred police use of deadly force against unarmed fleeing felons and granted some new rights to indigent criminal defendants. Older workers alleging violations of age discrimination statutes were upheld three times.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which had called last year’s court record “appalling” and “statist,” cautiously conceded that this term’s decisions “contained a measure of encouragement for civil libertarians.” Rex E. Lee, who served as solicitor general for most of the term, acknowledged that the Administration had suffered “major disappointments” in some key cases this term.

Nonetheless, the justices’ 1984-85 record was far from one-sided: Prosecutors still won several notable victories, as did the Administration. Overall, the federal government won 81% of its cases before the court--down from the 87% it won last year.

Thus, once again, the court, under Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, defied easy labels and tidy categories.

“This term showed that this court is not all that conservative,” Jesse H. Chopper, dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law, said. “This is a moderate court. The justices give some, they take some, they go forward, they go back. . . . It’s a very unpredictable court.”

Last term, the court sided with federal, state and local governments and against individuals in 56 of 69 cases it heard involving civil liberties--the highest proportion (81%) in 45 years, according to a study by Geoffrey R. Stone, professor of law at the University of Chicago. Government had won between 54% and 70% of those cases in the five previous terms.

Like some other observers, Stone concluded that the court had entered “an era of aggressive majoritarianism,” reflecting increasing insensitivity to the minority. But this term, the government prevailed in just 29 of 55 (53%) such cases, according to an analysis by the National Law Journal.

Stone believes that, in the long run, the court will continue to strongly favor the government. This term, he said, it was possible that the justices may have been reacting to criticism of the previous year’s record.

‘Sensitive to Attacks’

“Justices are just like anyone else,” he said. “Institutionally, they are sensitive to attacks, particularly those that assert that the court is overly political or ideological. Such criticism could have had an effect, even subconsciously.”

The religion cases on the court’s docket dominated this term. There was considerable speculation that the justices would continue a recent trend toward easing the constitutional barriers separating church and state. In recent years, the court had decided to permit tuition tax deductions for parents of parochial school students, had upheld the service of chaplains in state legislatures and had permitted the inclusion of a Nativity scene in a city-sponsored Christmas display.

But this term, the court rejected pleas from the Administration and state officials to allow greater governmental aid and accommodation of religion. Constitutional challenges by individuals and an employer were upheld in four major cases.

The court struck down an Alabama law establishing a “moment of silence” in public schools for voluntary prayer, a Connecticut law granting employees an unqualified right to a day off on their Sabbath, a state and locally funded program in Grand Rapids, Mich., providing remedial and enrichment instruction in parochial school classrooms and a federally funded program in New York City in which public school teachers went to religious schools to conduct remedial classes for low-income students.

Left Room to Maneuver

But characteristically, the justices left room to maneuver. Under their rulings, it appeared that “moment of silence” laws would be upheld if their purpose was not merely to return prayer to the classroom but to permit meditation or other private thought. Employers could still be required to make a “reasonable” attempt to accommodate employee religious observances when there was no undue hardship. And tax-funded instruction programs for parochial students might still be allowable if they are conducted off the premises of religious institutions.

Nonetheless, the court’s rulings represented a surprising setback for the Administration. Lee, whose office represents the government in cases before the court, was particularly disappointed in the court’s invalidation of the New York City remedial program for the disadvantaged.

“There is something wrong with freedom of religion-constitutional jurisprudence that prohibits benefits that are really needed and really helped kids, solely because their parents exercised their constitutional rights (to attend private school),” Lee said. “That’s just wrong.”

The school aid rulings also underscored the pivotal centrist role of Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. Powell had voted with the majority in the tax deduction, legislative chaplain and Nativity scene rulings lowering the church-state barrier. But in the Grand Rapids and New York cases he joined in 5-4 majorities that raised the barrier. Overall during the term, Powell voted with the majority in 14 of 18 cases decided by votes of 5 to 4. And it was Powell who did not participate--because of illness--in all eight cases in which the court was deadlocked 4 to 4.

Wide Assortment of Cases

The justices upheld individual claims in a wide assortment of other cases. The court:

--Gave indigent criminal defendants the constitutional rights to a state-paid psychiatrist when they are asserting the insanity defense and to effective assistance of counsel when appealing convictions.

--Held unconstitutional the use of deadly force to stop fleeing felons unless there is a serious threat to the safety of officers or others.

--Ruled that state and municipal employees are entitled to notice and a hearing before they can be fired.

--Said that a suspect cannot ordinarily be forced to submit to surgery for removal of a bullet to be used as evidence against him.

Age Bias Claims Upheld

In three cases, the court, with eight of nine members 60 or over, upheld individual claims of age discrimination. The court said that Trans World Airlines could not deny pilots over 60 the same right younger pilots had to bid for jobs as flight engineers and that Western Airlines could not force flight engineers to retire at 60, as pilots are required to do. It also upheld the right of Baltimore firefighters to stay on the job after age 55, in a ruling that made it much more difficult for states and municipalities to mandate retirement for any public safety workers before age 70.

In several cases, there were significant victories for law enforcement and the Administration. The court:

--Ruled that failing to inform a suspect of his rights before obtaining a confession does not invalidate a second confession after a proper warning.

--Held that motor homes are more akin to automobiles than traditional residences and thus can be searched without a warrant.

--Allowed public school authorities to make warrantless searches of students when there is reasonable suspicion that the law or school rules have been violated.

Warrantless Detentions

--Approved warrantless border detentions of persons suspected of smuggling drugs in their alimentary canals until evidence can be obtained from body wastes.

The Administration was upheld in key tests of executive authority and its interpretations of the law. The court:

--Held that the CIA could refuse to disclose even unclassified information it obtained from secret intelligence sources.

--Ruled that former Atty. Gen. John N. Mitchell was immune from a damage suit for authorizing warrantless “domestic security” wiretaps later declared unconstitutional.

--Said that the government may selectively choose to prosecute young men who publicize their refusal to register for the draft.

--Held that the Administration could bar political and legal advocacy groups from sharing in a federal workers charity campaign.

--Prohibited labor unions from penalizing members who resign and return to work during a strike.