In the majority opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy said federal law allows the practice and that "this is not a case where the magistrate judge is asked to preside or make determinations after the trial has commenced." Justice Clarence Thomas dissented, saying, "Whatever their virtues, magistrate judges are no substitute" for U.S. District Court judges.

U.S. District judges are appointed by the president, confirmed by the Senate, have life tenure and their salaries cannot be reduced. Magistrates, appointed by U.S. District judges, have no such protection.

A Mexican citizen, Gonzalez does not speak fluent English and did not have an interpreter at the bench conference where his attorney consented to designating the magistrate for the task.

Ordinarily, U.S. District Court judges participate in selecting juries for criminal and civil trials, a process known as voir dire.

Lawyers regard voir dire as one of the most important parts of a case because it often uncovers biases, leading to excluding members of the group of citizens from which a jury is selected.

There are more than 500 federal magistrate judges, who serve eight-year terms and are recommended by a citizen's merit screening committee. The magistrate setup was begun by Congress in 1968, expanding on a system that is 175 years old.

Faced with increasing caseloads, the federal judiciary assigns an array of duties to magistrates. Those include initial proceedings in criminal cases, presiding over some minor criminal trials and trials of civil cases with the consent of both sides.

The result is that a lawsuit accusing some prominent companies of violating international law by assisting South Africa's former apartheid government will go forward.

The court's hands were tied by federal laws that require at least six justices to hear any case before them.

Short of the required number by one, the court took the only path available to it and upheld an appeals court ruling allowing the suit to proceed.

The justices have ties to Bank of America, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Colgate-Palmolive, Credit Suisse, Exxon Mobil, Hewlett-Packard, IBM and Nestle, among nearly three dozen companies that asked the high court to step in.

MBIA Inc. reported Monday a loss of more than $2 billion for the first quarter after taking a $3.6 billion charge for losses on derivatives, but shares of the embattled bond insurer traded as much as 10% higher.

Posting its third straight quarterly loss, MBIA continues to struggle with business difficulties in the face of falling house prices and a global credit crisis, but Chief Executive Jay Brown sounded an optimistic note.

"MBIA continues to be a sound financial institution," Brown said in a statement. "We have ample liquidity, our balance sheet is built to withstand credit stress levels many multiples of what we're experiencing now, and our business model is proving that we are adequately capitalized to satisfy any potential claims on our insured portfolio."

Shares of MBIA rose more than 6% to $10.04 in morning action, after reaching an intraday high at $10.35.

The company's net loss was $2.41 billion, or $13.03 a share. MBIA had earned $198.6 million, or $1.46 a share, in the year-earlier first quarter.
During the latest quarter, it recorded a $3.6 billion unrealized loss on insured derivatives.

A high-profile law firm with an office in Charlotte has merged with a leading financial services law firm, partners announced Monday.

Atlanta-based Kilpatrick Stockton, which has 500 attorneys in nine offices worldwide, combined with the smaller Washington, D.C., firm Muldoon Murphy & Aguggia.

The merger became effective last week, and the new firm will be known as Kilpatrick Stockton.

The combination brings together some of the nation's leading attorneys representing financial institutions and businesses in various industries, partners said.

Police say Michael Gagnon was driving drunk and in the wrong direction Dec. 30 when his pickup truck hit a minivan filled with eight people returning from a Christmas trip.

Police say Gagnon's blood-alcohol level was more than twice the legal limit.

Gagnon has pleaded no contest. He was found guilty Friday of aggravated vehicular homicide and aggravated vehicular assault and faces up to 50 years in prison.

The suit by 635 plaintiffs aimed to stop the deepening of the harbor in Yokosuka, site of the U.S. naval base where the nuclear-powered USS George Washington is to be deployed, replacing the aging diesel-powered USS Kitty Hawk.

The carrier has sparked protests among Yokosuka residents who fear it poses a health danger. Many in Japan, the only country to be attacked by nuclear weapons, are also sensitive about any military use of nuclear technology.

Yoshie Ueki, a spokeswoman for the Yokohama District Court, said the court turned down the suit. She did not provide any further information about the case.

The plaintiffs had argued the harbor work, which began last year, would spread pollution, kill fish and damage the livelihoods of fishermen. They also argued the warship would threaten people in surrounding areas with possible radiation leakage should an accident occur.

But presiding Judge Tsuyoshi Ono rejected their claims, saying the harbor work posed no danger to nearby residents, according to Kyodo News agency.

The deployment of the USS George Washington marks the first time a U.S. Navy nuclear-powered vessel will be permanently based in Japan. The move is part of the U.S. military's effort to modernize its forces in East Asia — an area of potential flash points with North Korea or China.

Nuclear-powered warships have visited Japanese ports hundreds of times since 1964, and the United States has provided firm commitments to Tokyo regarding their safe use of Japanese harbors.

The United States has about 50,000 troops stationed in Japan under a mutual security pact.

The House Judiciary Committee is demanding documents and testimony from President Bush's closest advisers about the firing of federal prosecutors.

When the White House refused, the Democrat-led committee went to court. Lawyers called the president's actions the most expansive view of presidential authority since Watergate.

Late Friday night, the Bush administration responded with court documents of its own, similarly steeped in history. Lawyers called the lawsuit unprecedented. Citing George Washington and Grover Cleveland, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, they said these types of clashes get resolved without going to court.

"For over two hundred years, when disputes have arisen between the political branches concerning the testimony of executive branch witnesses before Congress, or the production of executive branch documents to Congress, the branches have engaged in negotiation and compromise," Justice Department lawyers wrote.

The idea the Congress can't order the president or his advisers to do something is a principle known as executive privilege. That privilege isn't spelled out in the Constitution and courts are rarely asked to decide exactly what it means. And when they have been asked, judges have tried to avoid getting too specific.

"Never in American history has a federal court ordered an executive branch official to testify before Congress," lawyers for the White House wrote.

That makes for a murky area of law and the Bush administration is urging U.S. District Judge John D. Bates not to tidy it up. The ambiguity fosters compromise, political solutions and the kind of give and take that the Founding Father envisioned, attorneys said.

Clearing it up "would forever alter the accommodation process that has served the Nation so well for over two centuries," attorneys wrote.

Congress wants to know whether the Bush administration fired several U.S. attorney for political reasons. That controversy contributed to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales resigning last year.

The Judiciary Committee subpoenaed former White House counsel Harriet Miers to testify and demanded documents from President Bush's chief of staff, Josh Bolten.