Justices Leave Big Decisions for Last

It’s annual rush to judgment time at the Supreme Court.

The justices are heading into the final month of the current term and have about two dozen cases to decide.

The court’s term always begins on the first Monday in October. While there is no official adjournment day, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist presses his colleagues to have their opinions and dissents written and ready for release by the end of June.

And, as usual, many of the biggest decisions have been left for last.

Here’s a Top Ten list of cases still to be decided:

* Abortion: Can states outlaw a midterm abortion procedure in which doctors remove the fetus intact, labeled a “partial-birth abortion” by opponents? The justices may well conclude that the law at issue is unclear in what it prohibits and send the matter back to the Nebraska Legislature. If so, it would take another round of litigation to finally resolve the question. (Stenberg vs. Carhart)

* Miranda warnings: Must police still inform suspects of their right to remain silent, as the court said in the 1966 ruling in Miranda vs. Arizona, or are confessions legal as long as they are voluntary? Congress in 1968 tried to overturn the Miranda decision by saying that voluntary confessions are constitutional, regardless of whether suspects were read their rights. More than 30 years later, the court will decide the issue. (Dickerson vs. United States)

* Grandparents’ rights: Can state judges order visitations between grandchildren and their grandparents, or do parents have a constitutional right to refuse? The court is considering a law from Washington state, but the ruling likely will affect similar laws in California and elsewhere. (Troxel vs. Granville)

* School prayer: Can public schools authorize students to vote on whether they want to open football games and other school events with a prayer, or does this injection of religion into school ceremonies violate the 1st Amendment? (Santa Fe School District vs. Doe)

* Aid to religious schools: Can the government give computers and other instructional aids to religious schools? This case is being closely watched because of the debate over vouchers. If the court says that the government can give general aid to religious schools, it will signal that vouchers are constitutional too. (Mitchell vs. Helms)

* Suing HMOs: Federal law shields employer-sponsored health plans that operate in good faith, but lawyers for patients say that the shield should be knocked down when doctors are paid incentives to hold down costs. If the justices agree, it could open the door wide to suits against HMOs. (Pegram vs. Herdrich)

* Gays and Boy Scouts: Do the Boy Scouts have a constitutional right to exclude openly gay individuals from their leadership ranks? The issue arose because a New Jersey court said that the Scouts’ exclusion of gays violates the state’s antibias law. By contrast, California’s courts have said that the state’s civil rights law does not cover private, voluntary groups such as the Scouts. (Boy Scouts vs. Dale)

* Myanmar laws: Can states and cities boycott companies that do business with repressive regimes such as Myanmar’s (formerly Burma), or does this infringe on the federal government’s exclusive power to set foreign policy? (Natsios vs. National Foreign Trade Council)

* Open primaries: Can California open its primary elections so that all voters can select the nominees or does the Constitution give the political parties a right to choose their candidates in elections that are limited to party members? (California Democratic Party vs. Jones)

* Abortion picketing: Can states and cities forbid picketing on the sidewalks in front of abortion clinics or does that restriction violate freedom of speech for protesters? (Hill vs. Colorado)