AP Photo

Justices were being asked by the Bush administration Tuesday to let it keep private the records of Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites)'s work on a national energy strategy.

The White House is framing the case as a major test of executive power, arguing that the forced disclosure of confidential records intrudes on a president's power to get truthful advice.

At the Supreme Court, which will rule before July, the administration finds a last hope in a dispute that began in July 2001 when a government watchdog group sued over Cheney's private meetings. The case has never gone to trial, but a federal judge ordered the White House to begin turning over records two years ago.

The Bush administration has lost two rounds in federal court. If the Supreme Court makes it three, Cheney could have to reveal potentially embarrassing records just in time for the presidential election.

Most of the talk among spectators who began lining up the night before was about Justice Antonin Scalia (news - web sites), not the case. He has refused to step down despite a controversy over a hunting trip he took with Cheney, an old friend, weeks after the high court agreed to hear Cheney's appeal.

"The big deal is Scalia," said 23-year-old law student Peter Stockburger of Austin, Texas. "It was dumb that he went on the hunting trip. It was stupid, but it wasn't illegal."

Watchdog group Judicial Watch and the environmental group Sierra Club (news - web sites) want the task force papers made public to see what influence energy industries had in outlining national energy policy.

The Sierra Club accused the administration of shutting environmentalists out of the meetings while catering to energy industry executives and lobbyists.

Solicitor General Theodore Olson told the justices in court filings that no energy industry officials participated improperly in meetings. He maintains that forcing information about the sessions into the open violates the separation of powers among the branches of government.

The Supreme Court also is known for private meetings.

"The court utilizes the process of confidential deliberation just as the executive branch does. Memos are drafted, deliberations occur and drafts of opinions are circulated — all behind closed doors," said Kris Kobach, a constitutional law professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City. "In both branches, deliberation is more candid, honest and valuable if it sometimes is sheltered from public scrutiny."  - (emphasis added)