Investors are calling for an inquiry into mutual fund fees, but the Supreme Court is reminding them that it isn't beholden to public opinion. The mutual fund industry is being accused of charging "excessive" fees, which could be particularly harsh on individual investors who use these tools as their primary way to access the market. Currently, the mutual fund industry has more than $10 trillion in assets under management, some of it through retirement and 529 college savings plans.

The Court doesn't seem inclined to step into the fray, saying that regulatory agencies are better equipped to address the situation. Chief Justice John Roberts, for example, said during arguments that "It makes a lot more sense to have the SEC regulate rates than to have courts do it, doesn't it?"

As Mel Brooks once said, "It's good to be the king." I often fantasize being a politician just for what it's worth after leaving office. We learned this week that Al Gore is now at least a centi-millionaire -- yes, he's worth over $100 million. That's a lot of global warming tacos.

An interesting exclusive article on Bloomberg.com is titled, "Pfizer, Exxon Find U.S. Justices as Shareholders May Cost Them." The premise of the article is that Supreme Court Justices' ownership of stocks occasionally requires them to side-step rulings, like this week's deadlock that allowed lawsuits over Pfizer's Rezulin diabetes drug. U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts owns the stock and needed to sit on the sidelines.

The same article cited Mark Herrmann, a product-liability lawyer at Jones Day in Chicago, as saying, "If you're on the industry side, it kills you that Roberts recused himself. That's your fifth vote.''

Bloomberg cites stocks either currently held or sold from in Chief Justice Roberts portfolio. They are: