I don’t have any special insight or anything, but this case seems to be an occasion for ill-informed people (some of whom are justices on the Supreme Court) to shoot their mouths off. Why shouldn’t I be able to get in on that? — Seriously thinking about taking up scrapbooking, calligraphy, flower-arranging, and cross-stitch just so I … Read more
The Supreme Court has decided to hear Hobby Lobby’s religious-freedom argument against the Obamacare contraception mandate. During this special time of the year, let us all take a moment to give thanks that John Roberts will have yet another chance to kick us all collectively in the nuts. Kathryn Jean Lopez covers the news on … Read more
Short answer, “No.” Longer answer, with a sarcastic “um” at the start, “Um, no.” Kim Daniels outlines the repercussions of a Supreme Court ruling that establishes a right to homosexual marriage. She makes it sound pretty catastrophic, and let me tell ya, she’s soft-pedaling it: We don’t yet know how the Supreme Court will rule … Read more
Have you been looking for someone to cogently, logically make the case against the supposed “right” to abortion on demand? Well, look no further; the Wall Street Journal makes the heck out of it right here: Last year the Journal of Medical Ethics published a paper by two academics who argued that “what we call … Read more
In the Supreme Court case of Shelby County v. Holder, Alabama is arguing to be released from the oversight requirements of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. I’m no lawyer myself, and I don’t know all the ins and outs of Constitutional law along with associated fancy-shmancy Latin terms and whatnot. However, I do know that … Read more
When people argue that we should give up on the Constitution–and I’m starting to hear these arguments more often than Taylor Swift break-up songs–one of the first reasons they give is that the Constitution was written by a bunch of old, dead, white men. Why should we care anything about what they thought? Well, there’s … Read more
I never cease to be amazed at conservatives ability to hold onto hope that all the things that go against them are really part of some overarching, long-term plan for total victory. Case in point: this post from The Atlantic about John Roberts’ real reason for ripping conservatives’ hearts out with his Obamacare ruling: So, if … Read more
CBS reports “Discord at Supreme Court is deep, and personal” (Don’t really need a comma there, but what do you expect? Journalism majors.): If Roberts had been with the liberals from the beginning, sources tell me that would have been one thing; but switching his position – and relatively late in the process – infuriated … Read more
No legal analysis is complete until we’ve heard from the man who brought us Cat Scratch Fever: Ted Nugent weighs in on the Obamacare ruling. Surprisingly, incendiary language is used. The bottom line is that Chief Justice Roberts‘ traitor vote will ensure more monumental spending and wasted taxes and put almost 15 percent of the nation’s … Read more
So, I see articles like this one: Memo to Mitt Romney: Obamacare is a tax because the Supreme Court rewrote the law to make it one. The Supreme Court did not uphold Obamacare’s individual insurance mandate as a tax. This is a difficult legal distinction to explain, but one that matters nonetheless. In Obamacare, the … Read more
Big Government takes a look at the dissent from the Supreme Court’s Obamacare ruling. Ah, the dissent. What might have been. The Court today decides to save a statute Congress did not write. It rules that what the statute declares to be a requirement with a penalty is instead an option subject to a tax. … Read more
Hey, look what Amazon recommended for me this morning: Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts, by Antonin Scalia I know somebody who could use a copy of this! Although now a copy probably falls and hits Roberts in the head every time he opens the door to his office.
Some of the more optimistic (and/or delusional) conservative commentators are trying talk themselves into believing that John Roberts’ opinion on Obamacare was really some kind of brilliant strategic move that will really benefit some conservative cause in the long run. I am skeptical, because if Roberts really wanted to do any of the things they … Read more
Oy, I want to turn away, but I can’t help looking. Like a horrific car crash, the closer you look at John Roberts’ Obamacare opinion, the worse it gets. John Yoo eviscerates: Worse still, Justice Roberts’s opinion provides a constitutional road map for architects of the next great expansion of the welfare state. Congress may … Read more
After following the news coverage and reading some of the commentary on the Supreme Court’s Obamacare ruling, I’ve come to the conclusion that it is indeed a bag-over-the-head, punch-in-the-face, and the appropriate response to John Roberts is this (Caution: appropriately dirty language): Some thoughts: — Are judges allergic to simple, easy-to-follow, straight-line reasoning? It seems … Read more
And while we’re on the subject of the Supreme Court, George Will says that Romey, if elected, should appoint judges who appreciate restraint, but who show a little bit less of it: One hopes that Romney knows that on today’s court the leading advocate of judicial “restraint” is the liberal Breyer, who calls it “judicial … Read more
US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has a new book out on interpreting legal texts, which I would like to force every American judge to memorize like a fraternity pledge memorizing the names and majors of the upperclassmen, spanking them with a giant paddle when they recite it incorrectly. A new book co-authored by Supreme … Read more