Supreme Court
Yesterday, the Supreme Court considered a provision of the Voting Rights Act that requires a federal remedy if a members of a minority group has "less opportunity than other members.
Peter Schuck asserts that "The Supreme Court's decision yesterday in Wyeth v. Levine gives unprecedented power to juries in deciding issues far outside their expertise." This is a very strange.
It probably would not shock you to know that under the Bush administration the Forest Service sold timber for logging without the legally required notice, comment and appeal provisions because.
This interesting-looking (well, to me) Slate book club reminds me that I just read another recent book about Marbury that attempts to at least partially debunk the decision that Sloan.
For one last go-round, I'll respond to a couple of the creative attempts in comments to justify essentially indefensible life tenure for judges. Essentially, all of these arguments are "largely.
I have some thoughts about Ruth Bader Ginsburg's Supreme Court tenure over at Comment Is Free.
The comments here focusing (correctly) on the age of potential judicial appointments -- a problem given that current norms favor appellate judges and there hasn't been a Democratic president for.
A couple of commenters in the previous thread have asked about who I'd like to see chosen if (God forbid) Ginsburg is forced to leave the Court. I addressed this.