The Supreme Court ruled today that the bulk of so-called ``gray market'' goods are legal, giving a green light to a big part of a multi-billion-dollar business that allows consumers to buy costly, brand-name imports at steep discounts. In another case, the court ruled that states sometimes may execute convicted murderers even if theirright to a lawyer's help was violated. In constitutional splintered voting, the justices upheld parts of U.S. Customs Service regulations that permit gray market products into the country without approval from trademark owners. The court also struck down part of the Customs Service rules, thereby limiting somewhat the availability of the discount goods. But some justices said those rules only apply to a small part of the dispute decided today. The exact size of the gray market is unclear. Estimates have ranged from $5 billion to $10 billion a year. The declining value of the dollar, reducing its purchasing power abroad, may have dampened the market. But the business still appears to be thriving. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the court, said a keyersity of Georgia's College of Veterinary Medicine. Nettles helped write the USDA report and is formulating regulations to use as a model for state governments. ``There are disease implications. There are human safety implications, which make the headlines read big _ a kid gets eaten by a polar bear in New York. And there's the escape factor, which from a naturalist point of view is very important.'' But the debate between exotic animal dealers and animal rights activists rages most fiercely over the moral issue. Is is right or wrong to put wild animals in a cage? And does captivity ensure a species' survival or hasten its death? ``I believe animals are here for our use, but not our abuse,'' says Hoctor. ``There's nothing wrong with owning a pair of ostrich boots if we're culling ostrich males. However, if in our smug admiration of ourselves we rape nature and make those animals endangered so we can have a pair of ostrich boots, that's wrong.'' Others believe there is no reason to exploit a wild animal when there are plenty of domestic animals that already provide companionship, food and warmth. ``That type of thinking _ justifying the exploitation of animals by juding them as an economic resource _ is going to lead to more and more species becoming endangered,'' says Herbet. ``Animals have an intrinsic value and ecological value. You shouldn't have to put a dollar value on it to ensure its survival.''