Justice Sandra Day O'Connor received three standing ovations and a mounted glass globe this week when she gave a speech at a black-tie dinner for the Atlanta-based Southern Center for International Studies.

At the U.S. Supreme Court, however, O'Connor's message -- that American courts should pay more attention to the laws of other countries -- gets a much more mixed reception.

O'Connor pointed out that her colleagues rarely consider international law. But she did not mention how passionate the justices get when they debate whether foreign court decisions should influence U.S. rulings. The issue came up in 1988, when the justices voted 5-4 that executing a man who'd committed his crime at the age of 15 violated the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

Showing an early example of her control of the court's center, O'Connor provided the crucial swing vote, writing separately to craft a narrower conclusion than four other justices who sided with the condemned inmate. But she did not criticize Justice John Paul Stevens' citation of international norms in favor of the inmate.

Referring to information presented by Amnesty International, Stevens wrote that a consensus against executing children was consistent with "other nations that share the Anglo-American heritage, and by the leading members of the Western European community." Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 815 (1988).

Justice Antonin Scalia, joined by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and the late Justice Byron R. White, called Stevens' reliance on Amnesty International's assessment "totally inappropriate as a means of establishing the fundamental beliefs of this Nation."

"We must never forget that it is a Constitution for the United States of America that we are expounding," Scalia wrote.

"In the present case," added Scalia, "the fact that a majority of foreign nations would not impose capital punishment upon persons under 16 at the time of the crime is of no more relevance than the fact that a majority of them would not impose capital punishment at all, or have standards of due process quite different from our own."

On Tuesday night, O'Connor noted that recent decisions striking down Texas' antisodomy law and holding that executions of the mentally retarded violated the constitution cited as support foreign laws against both practices.

"I suspect that over time, we will rely increasingly -- or take notice at least increasingly -- on international and foreign law in resolving domestic issues," O'Connor told the 450 Southern Center guests at the J.W. Marriott Hotel.

Getting It Right--by William F. Buckley Jr. (Regnery, $24.95)--continues Bill Buckley's series of turning the history (perhaps too narrow a canvas here) of 20th-century American politics into exciting novels. And, of course, the author himself is a participant in many of the incidents. In Getting It Right we see what Robert Welch, founder of the John Birch Society, and the impressive, puzzling and enormously influential (for a short time) Ayn Rand were really like. Rand's novels about the beginning of the conservative movement rivaled the Harry Potter novels in sales. Now it's hard to know quite why, as Rand's writing was unexceptional. Probably her loss of fame is because conservative thought and philosophies--so unusual at the time--have become so much a part of the conventional wisdom that her writings have lost their shock value. Welch and Rand had offshoots that had to be exorcised and dealt with before conservatism could be accepted. Buckley was the major force behind making conservatism appealing, understandable and respectable.

Microsoft Corp., the world's largest software maker, on Tuesday said it agreed to pay $200 million to settle class-action lawsuits filed in several U.S. states.

Under the settlements, eligible buyers of Microsoft's products will get vouchers that can be used to buy computer hardware or software. Half of any unclaimed vouchers will be used to buy computer equipment or software for schools.

Agreements were reached in Kansas, the District of Columbia, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Dakota and Tennessee. The class actions claimed Microsoft used its monopoly to overcharge customers for its software products.

Tuesday's announcement, brings the total number of consumer class action settlements over the past year to 10, Microsoft senior vice president and general counsel Brad Smith told reporters on a teleconference. The settlements are worth a total of $1.55 billion, Smith said. Class action lawsuits are pending in five states, Microsoft said.

The settlement is the latest in a string Microsoft has reached in recent years as it tries to clear up legal problems stemming from its antitrust battle with the government.