There remains zero evidence other than implausible bare assertion that Zimmerman was attacked before he killed the unarmed teenager he was stalking.
Author: Scott Lemieux
Even if the ACA narrowly survives, David Frum is in for a rude awakening: Even though the Solicitor General reportedly choked today, that doesn't change the fact that the conservatives.
After going back and forth for a year I ended up being somewhat more pessimistic than a lot of liberal observers before the argument, so I perhaps wasn't as shaken.
Paul Clement is so good that he started his argument today with a devastating rebuttal of his own argument that the mandate is unconstitutional: If the individual mandate is unconstitutional, then the rest of the Act cannot stand. As Congress found and the Federal Government...
While I'm waiting for my other piece on yesterday's argument, since it's relevant again I thought I'd dip into my nostalgia file and link to my piece about why the.
It's not even Darleen Click! In addition to being offensive, it doesn't make any sense. Why is the Politically Correct media -- bent on destroying poor, put-upon vigilante killers who.
Appropriately enough, the Mariners stick King Felix with the first of what is sure to be many no-decisions in a battle of deep, talented offenses. (A lot of critiques of Billy Beane are silly. What is a fair critique is that the three best position...
Some thoughts about day 2. The key to Kennedy's vote, evidently, is whether he can be convinced that there's a limiting principle. Kennedy, unlike the other conservatives, does seem to.
Sometimes nightmares do come true!
Much more later about today's argument, but I'd like to address this particular slippery slope hypothetical from Scalia, responding to the government's argument about the necessity of the mandate to the plainly constitutional regulatory framework established by the rest of the act: General Verrilli, you...
Good. The point that "This case is about the limits of the government's ability to delegate to a religious institution the right to use taxpayer money to impose its beliefs.
Since I was skeptical about whether the Court was seriously considering using a jurisdictional ruling to dodge the constitutional issue ex ante, the oral arguments yesterday certainly did nothing to.