Garrett Epps is correct that it’s not going to be the federal courts that eliminate or constrain the filibuster. And while I yield to nobody in my disdain for the filibuster, I also agree that the argument that the filibuster is unconstitutional is fundamentally unserious on the merits. The federal courts would be unlikely to intervene into a dispute over Senate procedure even given a decent constitutional argument, and the constitutional argument against the filibuster is notably feeble.
The Udall reform is no panacea, but some wedge to undermine the filibuster is necessary. It’s time to make it happen.