In other action Monday:
 The high court said it will hear an appeal of a federal court ruling that declared mud washing off logging roads is pollution. The federal appeals court in San Francisco ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to write regulations to reduce the amount of runoff from logging roads that reaches salmon streams.

Oregon and the timber industry filed separate appeals challenging the court ruling. The Obama administration agreed with the challengers that the appeals court erred in its ruling. But it urged the high court to stay out of the case because Congress and the EPA already are taking steps to address the appeals court ruling.
 The justices said they will not intervene in a dispute among three states over how Atlanta’s water use affects areas downstream. The decision is bound to frustrate authorities in Florida, Alabama, and even southern Georgia who say withdrawals from a federal reservoir in north Georgia harm wildlife, fisheries, and drinking water supplies downstream on the Chattahoochee River.

The legal battle had threatened to severely restrict Atlanta’s water supply. In 2009, a federal judge ruled against the city and found that it needed to lower its withdrawals from Lake Lanier. But last year a federal appeals court overturned that ruling and found Atlanta has a right to water from the reservoir.
 The court said it will not get involved in a fight over whether a 29-foot war memorial cross can remain on public land overlooking the Pacific Ocean in San Diego. The justices refused Monday to review an appeals court ruling that deemed the Mount Soledad cross an unconstitutional mixing of government and religion.

This decision came despite the fact that the court recently plunged into the dispute over the use of religious symbols to honor fallen troops two times . The court has recently signaled a greater willingness to allow religious symbols on public land.
 The court said it will not hear a complaint against Maryland’s congressional redistricting by voters unhappy with the new maps. The justices affirmed Maryland judges’ decision to throw the lawsuit out. Some voters had complained that the new maps passed by the state Legislature last year discriminated against African-Americans by failing to create a third majority-black congressional district in the state. The lower court judges also said the lawsuit did not meet the burden of proof that the map is a partisan gerrymander.