The convictions stand against the so-called "Cuban Five," who maintain they did not receive a fair trial because of strong anti-Castro sentiment in Miami. The men have been lionized as heroes in Cuba. Exile groups say they were justly punished.

The five — Gerardo Hernandez, Ramon Labanino (aka Luis Medina), Rene Gonzalez, Antonio Guerrero and Fernando Gonzalez (aka Ruben Campa) — were convicted in 2001 of being unregistered foreign agents. Three also were found guilty of conspiracy to obtain military secrets from the U.S. Southern Command headquarters.

Hernandez was convicted of murder conspiracy in the deaths of four pilots, members of the Miami-based Brothers to the Rescue organization, who were shot down by Cuban fighter jets in 1996 off the island's coast. The group sought to identify and help migrants leaving Cuba by sea. The Cuban government maintains the planes violated its airspace to scatter political pamphlets over the island.

U.S. Senate Republicans are in a quandary over the Supreme Court nomination of Sonia Sotomayor, aiming to raise pointed questions about her record without angering increasingly influential Hispanic voters.

Senator John Cornyn exemplifies the Republican dilemma over Sotomayor, who is the daughter of Puerto Rican parents who seems certain to be confirmed by the Democratic-led Senate as the first Hispanic Supreme Court justice.

One of seven Republicans on the 19-member Senate Judiciary Committee, Cornyn will take part in what he promises will be tough but civil questioning of Sotomayor, Democratic President Barack Obama's choice, at her hearing starting on July 13.

Cornyn is also chairman of the Senate Republican campaign committee that is charged with expanding a shrinking party and winning seats in the overwhelmingly Democratic Senate.

Hispanics, the fastest-growing U.S. minority who make up 15 percent of the population, are a key to any expansion plans.

Hispanics voted by a two-to-one margin for Obama in last year's presidential election. Many Hispanic voters greeted news of Sotomayor's nomination with joy, and Republicans are aware that Hispanics will be watching carefully how she is handled.

The justices, in an order Monday, say they will hear arguments next year in a case involving eight Shell station operators in Massachusetts who are fighting changes in lease terms that they say were intended to convert stations run by franchisees to company-owned facilities.

A federal jury awarded the gas station operators $3.3 million. The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld some aspects of the verdict and overturned others.

Shell, owned by Royal Dutch Shell PLC, and the station operators all appealed to the Supreme Court. The Obama administration also asked the court to intervene and rule in Shell's favor.

The case turns on provisions of the 30-year-old Petroleum Marketing Practices Act. Appeals courts around the country are divided on the issue.

The cases are Mac's Shell Service v. Shell Oil, 08-240, and Shell Oil v. Mac's Shell Service, 08-372.

The court, in an unanimous decision Monday, turned away Manoj Nijhawan's appeal. Nijhawan, who immigrated to the United States from India in 1985, had been convicted of fraud and money laundering, and stipulated that that the loss exceeded $100 million. The government then started deportation proceedings.

The law says any immigrant convicted of an aggravated felony at any time is deportable. A related statute said aggravated felonies include fraud and deceit in which the loss exceeds $10,000.

Nijhawan argued that a jury should have determined the loss before he could be deported. But the court disagreed with his arguments.

"The defendant's own stipulation, produced for sentencing purposes, shows that the conviction involved losses considerably greater than $10,000," Justice Stephen Breyer said in the opinion written for the court.

Francisco Espinosa gave United Student Aid Funds Inc. a Chapter 13 bankruptcy plan saying he would pay back $13,250 on his four student loans. The recipient, USA Funds, said he owed $17,832, but it did not object to his bankruptcy plan, which was finalized in 1994.

But in 2000, Espinosa's income tax refund was taken to pay on the rest of the debt.

USA Funds says the bankruptcy agreement is void because Espinosa never proved in court that paying the full amount would cause him undue hardship.

Espinosa says the bankruptcy agreement is final and the company cannot go back on it now. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco agreed, saying the time to object was before the bankruptcy was completed.

The motion, filed late Thursday, argued that the case of Arthur Smelt and Christopher Hammer does not address the right of gay couples to marry but rather questions whether their marriage must be recognized nationwide by states that have not approved gay marriage.

"This case does not call upon the Court to pass judgment ... on the legal or moral right of same-sex couples, such as plaintiffs here, to be married," the motion states. "Plaintiffs are married, and their challenge to the federal Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA") poses a different set of questions."

It's a different case from a recent federal lawsuit by two unmarried gay couples in California who claim a civil right to marry under the U.S. Constitution.

The government said Smelt and Hammer seek a ruling on "whether by virtue of their marital status they are constitutionally entitled to acknowledgment of their union by states that do not recognize same-sex marriage, and whether they are similarly entitled to certain federal benefits.

The one-paragraph ruling by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan came after the Obama administration asked the court to keep the pictures secret so it could appeal to the nation's highest court.

The administration last month said the disturbing photographs pose "a clear and grave risk of inciting violence and riots against American and coalition forces, as well as civilian personnel, serving in Iraq and Afghanistan."

The appeals court stayed its order supporting a lower court judge's decision to order release of the photographs until the Supreme Court had a chance to consider the case.

The administration had indicated it was going to release the pictures until President Barack Obama reversed the decision.

To support its arguments, the government filed partially secret statements from two top U.S. generals, David Petraeus and Ray Odierno.

In the filings, Odierno, who commands the troops in Iraq, said the 2004 release of photos of detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib prison "likely contributed to a spike in violence in Iraq" that year. Petraeus, who oversees U.S. military operations in the Middle East and Central Asia, said the images could also lead to more violence in Pakistan because it deals with Taliban attacks.

The American Civil Liberties Union had sought release of 21 pictures, saying the action would make the government more accountable and help bring an end to the abuse of prisoners.