Alito Champions Business Causes in First Full High-Court Term

By Greg Stohr

June 26 (Bloomberg) -- In what may have been the most pro- business U.S. Supreme Court term in decades, standing out as companies' No. 1 ally was no small feat. Justice Samuel Alito managed it in his first full year.

As the court term comes to a close this week, Alito has emerged as the justice friendliest to the interests of corporations. He sided with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the nation's largest business lobby, in 13 of 14 cases this term, more often than any of his colleagues. He cast votes to limit punitive damages, ease regulation and restrict suits by investors, consumers and alleged victims of job bias.

``On the cases where it's possible to differentiate the justices, he's been on the pro-business side every time,'' said Roy Englert, a Washington lawyer with Robbins Russell Englert Orseck & Untereiner who won a telecommunications case he argued before the court this year.

Alito, 57, played a central role in what Robin Conrad, executive vice president of the chamber's litigation unit, called an ``absolutely stellar term'' -- the best in the unit's 30-year history. The court under Chief Justice John Roberts ruled against the chamber in only two cases, both environmental fights.

Alito and Roberts, 52, are President George W. Bush's two appointees to the high court. Roberts, who succeeded the late William Rehnquist, is in his second year at the court's helm.

``I always thought of the Rehnquist court as a good forum for business,'' said Maureen Mahoney, a lawyer at Latham & Watkins in Washington who won three of four cases she argued this term. ``I think we now know that the Roberts court is even better.''

Beyond Roberts

In several cases this term, Alito went beyond Roberts in his support for business, breaking with the chief justice by backing restrictions on the ability of local governments to dictate where haulers can deliver garbage and on the power of states to regulate national banks.

The bank ruling ``was the one case that gave me pause about the chief,'' Conrad said. Roberts dissented from the ruling, which barred states from regulating the mortgage-lending subsidiaries of federally chartered banks.

Alito also went further than Roberts and the court majority last week in voting to raise the bar for shareholder lawsuits. Alito said the majority hadn't done enough to enforce a 1995 requirement that fraud allegations be described ``with particularity'' in a shareholder complaint.

Alito said the court's interpretation ``undermines the particularity requirement's purpose of preventing a plaintiff from using vague or general allegations.''

`Very Balanced'

``We're very happy with what we're seeing so far with Justice Alito,'' Conrad said. ``He's showing a very balanced approach to business issues.''

The shareholder case was one of several setbacks for trial lawyers. The court tightened its restrictions on punitive damages, telling a lower court to reconsider a $79.5 million award against Altria Group Inc.'s Philip Morris USA unit in a smoker lawsuit.

The court also backed insurers by limiting the rights of consumers under a federal credit-reporting law. And in a second investor case, the justices threw out an antitrust suit accusing Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Merrill Lynch & Co. and other investment banks of rigging 900 initial public offerings.

A Common Thread

A common thread in those rulings was an unwillingness to let cases go before a jury, said Jeffrey Robert White, a lawyer at the Center for Constitutional Litigation, a Washington group that challenges laws it believes impede access to justice. White filed a brief at the court on behalf of a trial-lawyer trade group in the shareholder case.

The court is saying, ``we'll trust the executive branch, we'll trust Congress a little bit, but we really don't trust the American people to do what's right when they sit in the jury box,'' White said.

The only setbacks for business came in the environmental area. The court told the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider its refusal to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions from new cars and trucks. The justices also ruled against Duke Energy Corp. in a fight over pollution reduction at power plants.

Many business cases weren't close calls for the court. A telecommunications antitrust case was decided by a 7-2 margin; the justices ruled unanimously in another antitrust dispute over allegations of predatory purchasing; a decision restricting whistleblower suits came on a 6-2 vote. The vote on the credit- reporting law was 7-2 on some issues, unanimous on others.

In a number of those cases, David Souter and Stephen Breyer -- justices who typically vote with John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg on social issues -- backed business arguments. That put them in accord with Roberts, Alito, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Anthony Kennedy.

``The court overall is good for business,'' Mahoney said.

To contact the reporter on this story: Greg Stohr in Washington at gstohr@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: June 26, 2007 00:05 EDT

		Email this article Printer friendly format