Supreme Court
Although it's sort of touching that they think governors and prosecutors will take scientific findings showing evidence to be unreliable into account if appellate courts can't. The other salient fact.
Michael Bailey and Forest Maltzman have a piece up at the Prospect arguing that the best political science modelling suggests that the Supreme Court will uphold the ACA. I don't.
As Paul mentioned, as expected the Supreme Court will be hearing the case. Perhaps the most interesting thing is that the Court will be having a longer-than-usual argument about the.
According to Scalia the latest new "Dred Scott" is Kelo, a perfectly straightforward application of precedent perfectly consistent with the text of the Constitution. It seems worth noting at this.
Litwhwick's depressing account of the oral arguments in Perry v. New Hampshire makes it pretty clear that the Supreme Court is disinclined to require any changes to how courts deal.
I have a piece up at Alternet about the myth of Robert Bork. Nocera's representative whining notwithstanding, the defeat of Bork wasn't unprecedented, it wasn't obstructionist, it was justified, and.
Adam Liptak has a useful roundup of yesterday's oral argument in Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of Burlington County. The case involves a blanket policy of strip searching people.
Rick Perry continues to long for the golden age of Hammer v. Dagenhart.