The Supreme Court was right yesterday; campaign expenditures are not the equivalent of other kinds of political speech. Now. if it would only apply this logic to other campaign finance cases...
constitutional interpretation
I have a piece up at the Prospect about the obvious constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act. In particular, the "activity/inactivity" distinction cooked up by conservatives to get the ACA.
Dahlia Lithwick is good on the Montana Supreme Court's rejection of Citizens United. It probably wouldn't save it from being overturned anyway, but the angle I would take in the.
And it's far from clear to what's going to happen. Thomas, ordinarily the staunchest states' "rights" justice, is different in preemption. And elite Republicans don't have monolithic views on immigration enforcement (in particular, you have to think that Kennedy might see auto executives getting detained...
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.
I promised to say more about Corey Robin's assessment of Antonin Scalia in The Reactionary Mind, some of which is excerpted here. Before I get to that, I should say that it's an excellent book I strongly recommend. And one initial complaint notwithstanding, the Ayn...
My views on this are basically the same as Rob. I don't mean to sound like Nino Scalia, but I actually do believe that the president is bound by the.
Neither majority decided on the merits; they were rejected on standing and ripeness grounds, respectively. Much more about this later, although for know I'll say that I was happy to.
It's a bit of an upset, but good to see the 6CA panel do the right thing. It should be noted that while both majority opinions do an excellent job of attacking the bad commerce clause arguments underlying the challenge to the ACA, James Graham's...
Jeff Rosen makes some good points in his piece about the divisions within the Supreme Court's conservative bloc. But I think he misses an important one: the way in which.
I have some reflections on the anniversary of Griswold v. Connecticut. The focus of the article is that conservatives have managed to turn the phrase "penumbras and emanations" into a.