Washington ? On the first day of the Supreme Court’s new term, justices turned down appeal after appeal, disappointing more than a thousand people, including Oklahoma City bombing conspirator Terry Nichols and exonerated Olympic Park bombing suspect Richard Jewell.

Also among the castoffs was an emergency request from New Jersey Republicans, who wanted to prevent Democrats from replacing incumbent Robert Torricelli on the Nov. 5 ballot for Senate. The high court’s refusal to get involved means the Democrats can put former Sen. Frank Lautenberg on the ballot.

The court also turned away assisted suicide advocate Dr. Jack Kevorkian, who is serving a jail term for his role in helping a man die, and the son of singer Frank Sinatra, who wanted to stop his one-time kidnapper from profiting through a movie about the crime.

The nine justices did not comment in refusing to consider those appeals, nor most of the approximately 2,000 others rejected Monday.

Following tradition, the court reopened for business on the first Monday in October, following a three-month summer break.

In the term that will run through next June, the court will consider legal fights over cross burning, the rights of abortion protesters, repeat criminals and sex offenders, and even trademark protection for lingerie maker Victoria’s Secret.

The court already has accepted 45 cases for the term, and will continue to add cases in the coming months. Overall, the court receives about 8,000 appeals annually and hears about 80.

Some of the biggest headlines could come from cases now waiting in the wings, among them tests of government power to combat terrorism, affirmative action in college admissions and the new law rewriting campaign funding.

Nichols’ appeal was his fifth failed attempt to win high court review of his five-year-old federal court conviction. Jewell’s case argued that he was libeled by a newspaper that reported he was a suspect in the 1996 bombing at Centennial Olympic Park in Atlanta. Kevorkian claimed his prosecution for the 1998 death of Thomas Youk was unconstitutional.

The court also on Monday refused to get involved in the case of a Wisconsin man under court order to stop fathering children.

David Oakley has fathered nine children out of wedlock. Oakley, who faces eight years in jail if he impregnates another woman, argued that it is unconstitutional for the government to limit his right to have children.

The case could have dragged the court into an argument about the constitutional rights to procreate an issue with implications for the emotionally charged debate over abortion.

“I fear that courts throughout the country will use this to trample on parents’ rights and poor people’s rights,” said Scott Sussman, an attorney for the Wisconsin-based Center on Fathers, Families and Public Policy, a group that helps needy parents.

Oakley owed $25,000 in child support when a Wisconsin court ordered the unmarried man to stop fathering children.

The 1999 ban was a condition of Oakley’s probation for skipping out on court-ordered child support payments. He was 34, with little education or money and a prison record.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court divided along gender lines in upholding the ban last year. The four male state justices prevailed.

“Here is a man who has shown himself time and again to be totally and completely irresponsible,” wrote Justice William Bablitch for the majority. “It is overwhelmingly obvious that any child he fathers in the future is doomed to a future of neglect, abuse or worse.”