“Don't Touch My Junk” Sneaks Into the Supreme Court
November 01, 2012
A case about dog-sniffing could have a huge impact on the use of privacy-invading technologies.
The Supreme Court Exposes Obama’s Circular Logic on Wiretapping
October 29, 2012
The Obama administration has taken a position that makes the Bush pro-secrecy campaign seem pale in comparison
The Court and the Future of Everything You Hold Dear
October 19, 2012
You shouldn't read too much into John Roberts's recent display of jurisprudence.
An Affirmative Action Solution Even Conservatives Should Love
October 10, 2012
On Wednesday the Supreme Court heard arguments in Fisher v. Texas, the most important affirmative action case in a decade. The Court is sharply divided on the question of the permissibility of racial preferences in university admissions, and the questions posed by the justices reinforced the possibility that Fisher will produce a 5-3 decision pitting five conservatives who want to severely restrict if not eliminate affirmative action in higher education against three liberals who want to preserve it. (Justice Elena Kagan is recused because she worked on the case as Solicitor General).
July 13, 2012
How to understand John Roberts.
Welcome to the Roberts Court: How the Chief Justice Used Obamacare to Reveal His True Identity
June 29, 2012
In 2006, at the end of his first term as Chief Justice, John Roberts told me that he was determined to place the bipartisan legitimacy of the Court above his own ideological agenda. But he recognized the difficulty of the task. “It’s sobering to think of the seventeen chief justices,” he said.
The Supreme Court’s decision to strike down most of Arizona’s immigration law is a cause for celebration—not least because it’s a model of how the Court can make decisions based on judicial philosophy rather than partisanship. The bipartisan majority opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the three liberal justices (Elena Kagan was recused) was modest and nuanced in tone and in substance—and consistent with all of the justices’ previous expressions of willingness to allow federal policies to trump state ones in cases where they conflict.
Last week, a New York Times/CBS poll found that only 44 percent of Americans approve of the Supreme Court’s job performance and 75 percent say the justices are sometimes influenced by their political views. But although the results of the poll were striking, commentators may have been too quick to suggest a direct link between the two findings.
In Defense of the Constitution: The Battle for Obamacare
June 08, 2012
AT THE END OF MARCH, when Solicitor General Donald Verrilli appeared before the Supreme Court to make the case for the Affordable Care Act, he was widely perceived to have choked. When he approached the podium in the packed courtroom, the stakes could not have been higher. Verrilli was defending the Obama administration’s central domestic achievement, a reform that had consumed the White House for the better part of the president’s first term.