Supreme Court Notebook

 Court: Broad protection for whistleblowers 

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court ruled Monday that whistleblower protections in a federal law passed in response to the Enron financial scandal apply broadly to employees of publicly traded companies and contractors hired by the companies.
The justices voted 6-3 Tuesday in favor of two former employees of companies that administer the Fidelity family of mutual funds. The workers claimed they faced retaliation after they reported allegations of fraud affecting Fidelity funds.
The case involved the reach of a provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, passed in 2002 in response to the Enron scandal, which protects whistleblower activity. The measure was intended to protect people who expose the kind of corporate misdeeds that arose at Enron.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said in her opinion that the law “shelters employees of private contractors that serve public companies, just as it shelters the public companies’ own employees.”
Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Samuel Alito and Anthony Kennedy dissented.
Jackie Hosang Lawson and Jonathan M. Zang complained of retaliation for whistle-blower activities from the privately-held parent company and subsidiary companies that run the Fidelity family of mutual funds.
Lawson resigned after complaining of harassment, and Zang was dismissed, and they both sued. A lower court refused to throw out their complaints, but that decision was overturned. The federal appeals court in Boston said only people who work for public companies are protected by the Sarbanes Oxley Act.
The case is Lawson v FMR, 12-3.
 
Court: Exempt funds protected in bankruptcy
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court says a bankruptcy court may not go after property or funds that are legally exempt from creditors.
The justices in a unanimous opinion ruled Tuesday in favor of a California man who declared Chapter 7 bankruptcy. The man claimed $75,000 of the value of his home was covered by California’s homestead exemption and was therefore exempt from the bankruptcy estate.
The man was later found to have fraudulently shielded some of his assets from creditors. A federal bankruptcy court said the exempt funds could be used to defray the attorney fees associated with uncovering the fraud, and a federal appeals court agreed.
But the Supreme Court reversed. It ruled that a bankruptcy court may not tap into exempt money to punish debtor misconduct.

Court appe­ars to favor police sued over chase 
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court appears likely to rule for police officers in Arkansas who were involved in a car chase that ended with the deaths of the driver and his passenger.
No one on the court in arguments Tuesday seemed inclined to affirm an appeals court ruling allowing a civil lawsuit by the driver’s daughter to proceed against six West Memphis, Ark., police officers. They fatally shot driver Donald Rickard and passenger Kelly Allen in a chaotic scene on a Memphis street following a chase that began across the Mississippi River in Arkansas.
The lawsuit says police used excessive force. But several justices said the officers should be shielded from liability.
 
High court to look at facial hair, teeth-whitening 
WASHINGTON (AP) — Facial hair and teeth-whitening will be getting unusually prominent attention from the Supreme Court.
The court agreed Monday to hear two cases during its next term that involve matters of personal hygiene in vastly different settings.
In one case, the court will decide whether an Arkansas prison inmate must be allowed to grow a short beard in accordance with his religious beliefs. The justices will hear an appeal from inmate Gregory Holt, who says his Muslim beliefs require him to grow a beard.
State corrections officials say their grooming policy prohibiting beards promotes hygiene and safety. The court previously blocked the state from forcing Holt to shave the beard while the appeal was under consideration.
The 38-year-old Holt is serving a life sentence for domestic violence and burglary. Prosecutors alleged that Holt cut his girlfriend’s throat and stabbed her in the chest at her mobile home.
Holt’s initial petition to the court was handwritten and filed without the benefit of an attorney, but he has since been represented by a lawyer.
Separately, the high court is taking up a North Carolina case in which the state’s dental regulatory board argues that only dentists should be allowed to whiten teeth. The state Board of Dental Examiners is challenging a lower court ruling and an order by the Federal Trade Commission that said the board engaged in unfair competition in the market for teeth-whitening services by shutting down businesses such as day spas and tanning booths that offered the service.
The board sued the FTC in 2011, saying the agency overstepped its authority. But the federal appeals court in Richmond, Va., sided with the FTC.