PREVIEW / SUPREME COURT : Justices Face Rush to Judgment as They Leave Their Toughest Cases Until Last

This week begins the annual rush to judgment at the Supreme Court.

In the five weeks between Memorial Day and the end of June, the justices usually hand down their most important opinions of the term. This year, 56 cases are awaiting decision, about one-third of the court’s annual workload.

So far, this year’s term has been more low key and less ideologically polarized than last year’s, when the justices narrowed civil rights laws in a series of 5-4 votes. But, typically, the fireworks occur just before the 4th of July holiday and the beginning of the summer recess, because the court tends to put off the hardest cases until last.

This year is no exception:

RIGHT TO DIE--Does the Constitution give individuals a “right to die”? Most state courts have said yes, but the Supreme Court has yet to rule for the nation.

In the pending case, the parents of a comatose Missouri woman want to have a hospital stop feeding her, but the state Supreme Court refused to grant permission. It said that, when the wishes of the patient were unknown, it would “err on the side of life.”

Although this has been the most closely watched case of the term, it may well yield a narrow ruling whose impact is felt mostly in Missouri. (Cruzan vs. Missouri, 88-1503.)

ABORTION--May a state require a pregnant minor to notify both her parents 48 hours before having an abortion? This case requires the court to again balance a teen-ager’s right to abortion versus the interest of her parents, a ruling that could affect laws in 31 states. (Hodgson vs. Minnesota, 88-1125.)

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION--May the federal government give a preference to blacks, Latinos and women in awarding radio and television licenses so as to foster “diversity” on the airwaves? The court’s conservative majority, increasingly skeptical of affirmative action, could use this case to ban it in the federal government. (Metro Broadcasting vs. FCC, 89-453.)

HIGHWAY CHECKPOINTS--May state police set up checkpoints on highways to look for drunk drivers? The Michigan state courts said no, because such checkpoints violate the driver’s right to be free from unreasonable searches. Moreover, the stops were ineffective in deterring drunk driving, the state court said. But, last year, the Supreme Court on a 5-4 vote allowed widespread drug testing of government employees, and it is considered likely to apply the same reasoning to uphold sobriety checkpoints. (Michigan vs. Sitz, 88-1897.)

BIBLES AT SCHOOL--May high school students meet for Bible readings on school grounds? This case will give more indication of whether the court is ready to abandon the notion that the Constitution demands a strict separation of church and state. In 1962 and 1963, the justices banned official prayers and Bible reading in public schools. But the court seems willing to permit a more public role for religion. (Board of Education vs. Mergens, 88-1597.)

CHILD ABUSE--The court will decide two cases involving testimony in child abuse cases. In Idaho, a mother was convicted of molesting her child, based in part on testimony by a doctor. But the state Supreme Court threw out the conviction, ruling that the doctor’s testimony was hearsay that could not be fairly rebutted by the defendant’s lawyer. (Idaho vs. Wright, 89-260.) The second case will test whether children may testify over closed circuit television so they do not have to confront their alleged abusers. (Maryland vs. Craig, 89-478.)

FLAG BURNING--Does the right to free speech and political protest include the right to burn a flag? Last year, the court said yes. When many in Congress shouted “No!” the court agreed to consider a new law forbidding the desecration of the flag. But, during last week’s arguments, none of the justices sounded ready to change their votes. (U.S. vs. Eichman, 89-1433.) If so, Congress this summer may consider a constitutional amendment to protect the flag.