Reply #7: Finally found something

[DistressedAmerican]

From CNN (I know they are the enemy):
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/07/05/dean.cheney/index.html

(snip)
(FindLaw) -- On June 24, in Cheney v. U.S. District Court, the Supreme Court gave Vice President Dick Cheney only a partial victory in the suit that seeks to learn how his National Energy Policy Development Group developed its recommendations.

The plaintiffs in the suit suspect that -- and want to find out whether -- there was extensive involvement and improper influence by private industry in what was supposed to be a government group. They note that the Group's recommendations had a decidedly pro-energy slant.

Cheney wanted the suit to be dismissed. Instead, the court sent the case back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit for further adjudication.

This case is laden with important implications. That is still true. Indeed, the Supreme Court may have avoided an ultimate decision in the case in part because of the political reverberations that would doubtless have resulted from their examining the separation of powers issues (read: the secrecy powers of the presidency) in an election year.

Scalia sides with Cheney, as expected

This case received a great deal of press attention because Justice Antonin Scalia refused to recuse himself from it, despite his duck-hunting trip with Cheney. And unsurprisingly, Scalia did indeed side with Cheney in the case.

But rather than write an opinion, Scalia joined a brief dissent by Justice Clarence Thomas that would have resolved the matter in Cheney's favor -- and resolved it on the merits, going into the constitutional issues involved.