Dan Hannan, the MEP man has written ... a 750 word thing for The Washington Examiner v 3.1. See if you can guess what it is about. It starts.
Atypically for something written by John Yoo, I actually agree with much of the first part of his Clarence Thomas apologia. Thomas is the most principled conservative on the Court,.
LT comments in the thread earlier today that (s)he can see some relevance of animals to the abortion debate. And I can actually see it in one narrow context. In.
Jack Balkin and Eugene Volokh duked it out yesterday on BloggingHeads in what Balkin calls the "Bill of Rights Edition" of Blogging heads. They take on the First and Second.
Jonathan Zasloff beat me to Cass Sunstein's discussion of Roberts and Alito's "minimalism," but since I'm working on and thinking about a scholarly article about it I thought I'd add.
I have an article up in TAP about the affirmative action cases and "originalism." The cases make clear that for even justices who occasionally practice it rarely gets in the.
At this thread over at TAPPED, some commenters tried to defend Scalia's credentials as a principled originalist who was never political. In response, I mentioned Bush v. Gore, which not.
Today's "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" case actually turns on relatively narrow grounds. The problem with Roberts' opinion is that it turns on a claim that punishing the student was justified.
