Trump administration in spotlight as U.S. top court returnsWASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Trump administration’s ability to win over the U.S. Supreme Court will be put to the test when the nine justices begin their new term on Monday with major cases awaiting on voting rights, religious liberty, union funding and class-action suits. President Donald Trump’s Justice Department already has flipped the government’s position in some important cases, reversing the stance taken under Democratic former President Barack Obama, and could have a receptive audience on the court, whose term runs through June. The addition of Trump’s appointee Neil Gorsuch in April restored the court’s 5-4 conservative majority, as the new justice prepares to begin his first full term. The administration has backed companies against employees and supported voting laws that critics say could prevent eligible people from casting ballots. [Graphic showing major cases: tmsnrt.rs/2y3eCs6] It also has reversed the Obama administration’s stance in support of protections for gay workers under federal law, an issue that could reach the court within weeks.  The Supreme Court generally gives special deference to the views of the U.S. solicitor general, the federal government’s top lawyer. Trump’s appointee Noel Francisco holds the job. But some justices may look dimly upon the government abruptly changing its position in cases. Former Justice Department lawyer Pratik Shah said a flip-flop can provide an opening for justices sympathetic to the view of the prior administration, who can ask: “What in the law has changed to warrant a different view?” The court’s oldest justice, 84-year-old liberal Ruth Bader Ginsburg, has called the upcoming term “momentous” owing to the importance of the cases on the docket. On Tuesday, the term’s second day, the justices are due to hear a case that could help shape U.S. elections for decades involving the long-standing practice of a majority party manipulating electoral boundaries for future elections to try to cement their hold on power. Wisconsin is appealing a lower-court ruling that the way the Republican-led legislature redrew boundaries following the 2010 census was so far-reaching in its bid to marginalize Democratic voters that it violated the Constitution. In a case expected to be argued in December involving free speech, religious liberty and gay rights, the justices will weigh whether a Denver-area baker who cited his Christian beliefs in refusing to make a wedding cake for a gay couple can be penalized for violating a Colorado anti-discrimination law. The new administration has backed the baker, infuriating groups that support gay, lesbian, transgender and bisexual rights. “President Trump said on the campaign trail that he’s an advocate for LGBT people, but actions speak much louder than words,” said James Esseks, an American Civil Liberties Union lawyer who works on gay rights issues. The Supreme Court on Monday canceled arguments that had been scheduled for Oct. 10 in what would have been the biggest case of the term, whether Trump’s ban on people entering the United States from several Muslim-majority countries amounted to unconstitutional discrimination against Muslims. The action came after a temporary ban expired and the administration announced a new set of restrictions. ‘ONE-TWO PUNCH’ A case on the first day of the term on Monday presents a rarity, with the administration facing off against one of the federal government’s own agencies, the National Labor Relations Board. “That will be a first for me in the nearly 25 years I have served on the court,” Ginsburg said at a Georgetown Law Center event on Sept. 20. The administration is no longer defending the NLRB’s position that employment agreements in which businesses require workers to waive their rights to bring class-action claims are invalid. The waivers compel workers to individually arbitrate disputes with employers rather than bringing collective lawsuits with co-workers. The court’s conservative majority is expected to be sympathetic to the arguments made by employers.  The court on Thursday agreed to hear a case that could end an important source of funding for unions representing police, teachers and other government employees. The dispute centers on fees that some states require non-union members to pay to unions in lieu of dues to fund collective bargaining and other organized labor activities.  Claire Prestel, associate general counsel of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), said those cases could lead to a “one-two punch against workers.” The Obama administration backed the unions in a similar case in which the justices ended with a 4-4 deadlock last year. The Trump administration may change course and back the anti-union challengers. In another about-face, Trump’s Justice Department has also sided with Ohio in its bid to revive a state policy of purging infrequent voters from voter-registration lists, reversing the Obama administration’s stance that the practice was illegal. Obama’s former attorney general, Eric Holder, joined a friend-of-the-court brief criticizing the reversal, saying the Trump administration policy departed from the government’s  interpretation of Ohio’s law dating back more than 20 years and spanning administrations from both parties. The justices are set to hear that case on Nov. 8. politicsNews
trump administration spotlight top court returnswashington reuters the trump administration ability win supreme court put test nine justices begin new term monday major cases awaiting voting rights religious liberty union funding suits president donald trump justice department already flipped government position important cases reversing stance taken democratic former president barack obama could receptive audience court whose term runs june the addition trump appointee neil gorsuch april restored court conservative majority new justice prepares begin first full term the administration backed companies employees supported voting laws critics say could prevent eligible people casting ballots graphic showing major cases it also reversed obama administration stance support protections gay workers federal law issue could reach court within weeks the supreme court generally gives special deference views solicitor general federal government top lawyer trump appointee noel francisco holds job but justices may look dmy upon government abruptly changing position cases former justice department lawyer ratio shah said provide opening justices sympathetic view prior administration ask what law changed warrant different view the court oldest justice liberal ruth baker ginsburg called upcoming term moments owing importance cases docket on tuesday term second day justices due hear case could help shape elections decades involving practice majority party manipulating electoral boundaries future elections try cement hold power wisconsin appealing ruling way legislature review boundaries following census bid marginalized democratic voters violated constitution in case expected argued december involving free speech religious liberty gay rights justices weigh whether baker cited christian beliefs refusing make wedding cake gay couple penalized violating colorado law the new administration backed baker infuriating groups support gay lesbian transgender bisexual rights president trump said campaign trail advocate lgbt people actions speak much louder words said james assets american civil liberties union lawyer works gay rights issues the supreme court monday canceled arguments scheduled would biggest case term whether trump ban people entering united states several countries amounted unconstitutional discrimination muslims the action came temporary ban expired administration announced new set restrictions punch a case first day term monday presents rarity administration facing one federal government agencies national labor relations board that first nearly years i served court ginsburg said georgetown law center event the administration longer defending lrb position employment agreements businesses require workers waive rights bring claims invalid the waivers compel workers individually arbitrary disputes employers rather bringing collective lawsuits the court conservative majority expected sympathetic arguments made employers the court thursday agreed hear case could end important source funding unions representing police teachers government employees the dispute centers fees states require members pay unions lieu dues fund collective bargaining organized labor activities claire pressed associate general counsel service employees international union sei said cases could lead punch the obama administration backed unions similar case justices ended deadlock last year the trump administration may change course back challengers in another trump justice department also sided ohio bid revive state policy purging infrequent voters lists reversing obama administration stance practice illegal obama former attorney general eric holder joined brief criticizing reversal saying trump administration policy departed government interpretation ohio law dating back years spanning administrations parties the justices set hear case politicsnews
Your task is to classify the provided input as real or fake news. Label 0 is meant for fake news, Label 1 is for real news. TEXT: Trump administration in spotlight as U.S. top court returnsWASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Trump administration’s ability to win over the U.S. Supreme Court will be put to the test when the nine justices begin their new term on Monday with major cases awaiting on voting rights, religious liberty, union funding and class-action suits. President Donald Trump’s Justice Department already has flipped the government’s position in some important cases, reversing the stance taken under Democratic former President Barack Obama, and could have a receptive audience on the court, whose term runs through June. The addition of Trump’s appointee Neil Gorsuch in April restored the court’s 5-4 conservative majority, as the new justice prepares to begin his first full term. The administration has backed companies against employees and supported voting laws that critics say could prevent eligible people from casting ballots. [Graphic showing major cases: tmsnrt.rs/2y3eCs6] It also has reversed the Obama administration’s stance in support of protections for gay workers under federal law, an issue that could reach the court within weeks.  The Supreme Court generally gives special deference to the views of the U.S. solicitor general, the federal government’s top lawyer. Trump’s appointee Noel Francisco holds the job. But some justices may look dimly upon the government abruptly changing its position in cases. Former Justice Department lawyer Pratik Shah said a flip-flop can provide an opening for justices sympathetic to the view of the prior administration, who can ask: “What in the law has changed to warrant a different view?” The court’s oldest justice, 84-year-old liberal Ruth Bader Ginsburg, has called the upcoming term “momentous” owing to the importance of the cases on the docket. On Tuesday, the term’s second day, the justices are due to hear a case that could help shape U.S. elections for decades involving the long-standing practice of a majority party manipulating electoral boundaries for future elections to try to cement their hold on power. Wisconsin is appealing a lower-court ruling that the way the Republican-led legislature redrew boundaries following the 2010 census was so far-reaching in its bid to marginalize Democratic voters that it violated the Constitution. In a case expected to be argued in December involving free speech, religious liberty and gay rights, the justices will weigh whether a Denver-area baker who cited his Christian beliefs in refusing to make a wedding cake for a gay couple can be penalized for violating a Colorado anti-discrimination law. The new administration has backed the baker, infuriating groups that support gay, lesbian, transgender and bisexual rights. “President Trump said on the campaign trail that he’s an advocate for LGBT people, but actions speak much louder than words,” said James Esseks, an American Civil Liberties Union lawyer who works on gay rights issues. The Supreme Court on Monday canceled arguments that had been scheduled for Oct. 10 in what would have been the biggest case of the term, whether Trump’s ban on people entering the United States from several Muslim-majority countries amounted to unconstitutional discrimination against Muslims. The action came after a temporary ban expired and the administration announced a new set of restrictions. ‘ONE-TWO PUNCH’ A case on the first day of the term on Monday presents a rarity, with the administration facing off against one of the federal government’s own agencies, the National Labor Relations Board. “That will be a first for me in the nearly 25 years I have served on the court,” Ginsburg said at a Georgetown Law Center event on Sept. 20. The administration is no longer defending the NLRB’s position that employment agreements in which businesses require workers to waive their rights to bring class-action claims are invalid. The waivers compel workers to individually arbitrate disputes with employers rather than bringing collective lawsuits with co-workers. The court’s conservative majority is expected to be sympathetic to the arguments made by employers.  The court on Thursday agreed to hear a case that could end an important source of funding for unions representing police, teachers and other government employees. The dispute centers on fees that some states require non-union members to pay to unions in lieu of dues to fund collective bargaining and other organized labor activities.  Claire Prestel, associate general counsel of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), said those cases could lead to a “one-two punch against workers.” The Obama administration backed the unions in a similar case in which the justices ended with a 4-4 deadlock last year. The Trump administration may change course and back the anti-union challengers. In another about-face, Trump’s Justice Department has also sided with Ohio in its bid to revive a state policy of purging infrequent voters from voter-registration lists, reversing the Obama administration’s stance that the practice was illegal. Obama’s former attorney general, Eric Holder, joined a friend-of-the-court brief criticizing the reversal, saying the Trump administration policy departed from the government’s  interpretation of Ohio’s law dating back more than 20 years and spanning administrations from both parties. The justices are set to hear that case on Nov. 8. politicsNews
Your task is to classify the provided input as real or fake news. Label 0 is meant for fake news, Label 1 is for real news. TEXT: trump administration spotlight top court returnswashington reuters the trump administration ability win supreme court put test nine justices begin new term monday major cases awaiting voting rights religious liberty union funding suits president donald trump justice department already flipped government position important cases reversing stance taken democratic former president barack obama could receptive audience court whose term runs june the addition trump appointee neil gorsuch april restored court conservative majority new justice prepares begin first full term the administration backed companies employees supported voting laws critics say could prevent eligible people casting ballots graphic showing major cases it also reversed obama administration stance support protections gay workers federal law issue could reach court within weeks the supreme court generally gives special deference views solicitor general federal government top lawyer trump appointee noel francisco holds job but justices may look dmy upon government abruptly changing position cases former justice department lawyer ratio shah said provide opening justices sympathetic view prior administration ask what law changed warrant different view the court oldest justice liberal ruth baker ginsburg called upcoming term moments owing importance cases docket on tuesday term second day justices due hear case could help shape elections decades involving practice majority party manipulating electoral boundaries future elections try cement hold power wisconsin appealing ruling way legislature review boundaries following census bid marginalized democratic voters violated constitution in case expected argued december involving free speech religious liberty gay rights justices weigh whether baker cited christian beliefs refusing make wedding cake gay couple penalized violating colorado law the new administration backed baker infuriating groups support gay lesbian transgender bisexual rights president trump said campaign trail advocate lgbt people actions speak much louder words said james assets american civil liberties union lawyer works gay rights issues the supreme court monday canceled arguments scheduled would biggest case term whether trump ban people entering united states several countries amounted unconstitutional discrimination muslims the action came temporary ban expired administration announced new set restrictions punch a case first day term monday presents rarity administration facing one federal government agencies national labor relations board that first nearly years i served court ginsburg said georgetown law center event the administration longer defending lrb position employment agreements businesses require workers waive rights bring claims invalid the waivers compel workers individually arbitrary disputes employers rather bringing collective lawsuits the court conservative majority expected sympathetic arguments made employers the court thursday agreed hear case could end important source funding unions representing police teachers government employees the dispute centers fees states require members pay unions lieu dues fund collective bargaining organized labor activities claire pressed associate general counsel service employees international union sei said cases could lead punch the obama administration backed unions similar case justices ended deadlock last year the trump administration may change course back challengers in another trump justice department also sided ohio bid revive state policy purging infrequent voters lists reversing obama administration stance practice illegal obama former attorney general eric holder joined brief criticizing reversal saying trump administration policy departed government interpretation ohio law dating back years spanning administrations parties the justices set hear case politicsnews