The Supreme Court on Tuesday overturned the conviction of the Arthur Andersen accounting firm for destroying Enron Corp.-related documents before the energy giant's collapse.

In a unanimous opinion, justices said the former Big Five accounting firm's June 2002 conviction was improper. It said the jury instructions at trial were too vague and broad for jurors to determine correctly whether Andersen obstructed justice.

The ruling is a setback for the Bush administration, which made prosecution of white-collar criminals a high priority following accounting scandals at major corporations. After Enron's 2001 collapse, the Justice Department went after Andersen first.

Another failure on the Bush administration. William H. Rehnquist's decision too! And some of you talk about liberal judges! 

???? I would say its a failure of the Judiciary. The trial court judge was the activist judge who didnt follow the written law but no doubt injected his own views.
Obstruction of justice charge and virtually all crimes have an element of INTENT. Destroying documents isnt illegal. Destroying documents with the INTENT to obstruct justice is illegal.        MARK

So I wonder what the jury thought about intent?
When it comes to cases like these, I think that we should just go ahead and get rid of juries (people of our own peers) because we are probably too benighted to understand the legal process concerning corporate fraud and intent.

Wow! I guess that the Supreme Court can handle all those cases; they have nothing else better to do, right?     

Yeaahhh...  nothing to do with the major campaign donations  After all,  buying off a judge or a politician would be a major historical precedent

The supreme court judges are appointed and do have alliegences, though.