For the pure political operative, the truth of a statement or its value as public policy is entirely irrelevant. For the pure political operative, issues are just weapons.
Why overturning Roe v. Wade causes so much rage Read More »
Justice Thomas’s opinion affirms that the scope of the right to keep and bear arms is fixed by the words of the amendment. The law is reflected in those words, not in some judge’s idea of what is important.
The deeper significance of Justice Thomas’s 2nd amendment opinion Read More »
The case is a small victory against the administrative state.
The Supreme Court’s ‘American Hospital’ case: A view of the DC swamp Read More »
Overruling Roe would have no effect on any of these other cases.
Fact Check: No, overruling Roe v. Wade would not endanger other rights Read More »
A likely motive is to recreate what happened in Montana in 1972: to expose a potential swing justice to political pressure.
Why the Leak of the Draft Decision on Roe v. Wade? Read More »
Justice Thomas punctured a judicial balloon and Justice Gorsuch issued his own sizzling opinion.
The Fascinating Supreme Court Opinions in the Vaello Madero Case Read More »
An advocate of vast congressional power takes quotes out of context, misrepresents what others say, and makes historical errors
A Preliminary Response to Prof. Ablavsky’s “Indian Commerce Clause” Attack Read More »
The hysteria has been matched only by the detractors’ astonishing constitutional ignorance.
The ‘Independent Legislature Doctrine’—and why it frightens many on the left Read More »
The Constitution does not give Congress authority to regulate the adoption of children.
Indian Child Welfare Act: Another case of Congress’s overreach goes to the Supreme Court Read More »
The state and would-be “customers” interfering with [a religious] business model have no more constitutional standing than a thug who disrupts a church service or shouts down a speaker.
SCOTUS should uphold the right of religious people to refuse to serve the LGBT agenda Read More »
There’s only one coherent explanation for such programs, and that is political.
It is perverse to spend so much [constitutional law] class time on areas of recurrently-shifting jurisprudence, while neglecting constitutional principles that are just as central and far more enduring.
