Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to a Kentucky case challenging the legality of lethal injection. The suit was filed by two inmates in a Kentucky prison who are themselves on death row. The Supremes will have to decide whether or not lethal injection qualifies as "cruel and unusual punishment," which is prohibited by the Eighth Amendment.

The Supremes also granted certiorari to an Indiana voter ID case. An Indiana statute requires voters in that state to present a government-issued photo ID before voting. Critics of the measure say it amounts to de facto disenfranchisement, as the kinds of people who would be unable or unwilling to obtain a photo ID are the kinds of people who would vote Democratic. The Fourteenth Amendment requires both state and federal governments to extend "equal protection of the laws" to all people in the United States. To deny someone the right to vote based solely on that person's inability to pay for a photo ID is most certainly not "equal protection."

The Court's term begins Oct. 1 with oral arguments in two cases, neither of which is terribly interesting. In Washington State Grange v. Washington Republican Party, petitioner Washington State Grange Party believes that Washington's "top-two" primary system (in which voters in a primary choose from between the two most popular candidates, regardless of political affiliation) is unfair because it allows a candidate to list which party he or she personally prefers (and, through that, allow voters to identify which party they are from).

The second case, Board of Education of the City of New York v. Tom F, involves whether or not a disabled child is entitled to tuition reimbursement under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act even if that child hasn't received special education from a public agency.

See? Boring. But better cases are coming this term! And, we'll get to see how far to the right the Roberts court will again swing.