I have an article up at the Prospect about the worst Supreme Court decision you probably didn’t hear about this term. Well, actually, I should clarify that according to what we’ll charitably call the “logic” of the Supreme Court’s Republicans, I didn’t make any of the statements that appear under my name at all.
Since LGM prides itself on being fair and balanced, I should note that according to Ramseh Ponnuru the Court is not nearly pro-business enough. Ponnuru being smarter and better-informed than your typical conservative pundit, there are actually some truths expressed in the course of his column. But to borrow Scalia’s paraphrase of Churchill, what’s relevant isn’t true and what’s true isn’t relevant. Yes, Roberts and Alito are even more reflexively pro-business than Scalia and Thomas, and yes the Court lacks anything remotely resembling a Brennan/Marshall-style liberal, both points widely acknowledged by the Court’s critics and, if anything, more supportive of the critic’s position than Ponnuru’s. As to the more general claim that, despite its very pro-business record, a Court that is willing to hold that financial executives didn’t “make” statements they made in order to insulate them from accountability when they rip off their customers isn’t pro-business enough…let’s just say I continue to demur.