Court to Hear National Guard Case : Justices to Decide if U.S. Can Send Units to Latin America

The Supreme Court, taking a rare step into U.S. foreign policy, agreed today to decide whether the federal government has the power to order state National Guard units to duty in strife-torn Central America.

The court’s review of the issue comes at a time of heightened tensions with Central and South American neighbors as U.S. troops continue to occupy Panama after a successful invasion to oust Gen. Manuel A. Noriega and bring him to American justice

The court, which generally charts a path clear of such issues, agreed to review the policy in a case brought by Minnesota, which sought review of a ruling by the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals. The court will hear arguments in the case this spring with a ruling expected by summer.

The case began after National Guard units from Minnesota were ordered to active duty for a training mission in Honduras, which borders Nicaragua and long served as a sanctuary for U.S.-backed rebels. The state sued in federal court to halt the deployment.

However, the government pointed to a congressionally adopted 1986 amendment to the rules governing the use of the National Guard that prohibited governors from withholding consent to active duty. The so-called Montgomery Amendment was passed after several governors expressed opposition to the Reagan Administration’s Central American policy and said they would withhold consent for training their states’ guard units in the region.

The lower court agreed with the government, and the state appealed to the Supreme Court.

Minnesota National Guard units have trained in Central America since the court case began and a small group was in Panama last month when U.S. forces toppled Noriega.

The matter became an issue in the 1988 presidential campaign when Democratic candidate Michael S. Dukakis denounced the Reagan Administration for what he called a “failed and illegal” policy of supporting the Nicaraguan rebels. He said sending National Guard troops to the region was an attempt to intimidate Nicaragua.

The Justice Department described Dukakis’ position as “a dagger aimed at the heart of national defense.”

In other action today, the court:

* Agreed to decide whether the federal government can give special licensing preferences to television and radio stations owned by women and minority members.

* Let stand a ruling that people have no constitutionally protected right to privacy when at home speaking on a cordless telephone. The court, without comment, turned away arguments that law enforcement agents acted unlawfully when, without obtaining a court warrant, they monitored an Iowa family’s cordless-telephone conversations.

* Refused to become involved in a dispute from New York state that sought to reimpose the Federal Communication Commission’s “fairness doctrine” requiring broadcasters to air opposing viewpoints.