Ruth Bader Ginsburg
A Delay on Gay Marriage Isn't a Defeat
Equality activists shouldn't worry if the Supreme Court punts the issue
So Gay, Inc. wins again. The establishment institutions of the gay legal movement, like Mary Bonauto’s Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders and Evan Wolfson’s Freedom to Marry, long ago decided that the first gay marriage case to go to the Supreme Court should be a narrow challenge. They chose to attack the worst provisions of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which strip same sex couples like the plaintiff Edie Windsor legally married in their states, of all federal benefits. READ MORE >>
Gay Rights Gets a Brown v. Board—If It Doesn't Backfire
The Supreme Court has announced it will look at two gay marriage cases. Chris Matthews feels a thrill running up his leg. READ MORE >>
Why Tuesday Could Be a Turning Point for Gay Marriage
The Supreme Court Exposes Obama’s Circular Logic on Wiretapping
At the Supreme Court on Monday, as Hurricane Sandy approached, Chief Justice John Roberts kept the Court open to hear Clapper v. Amnesty International, the most important wiretapping case of the term. Judging from his reception during the oral arguments, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli may have wished that the storm had closed the Court a day early. READ MORE >>
The Court and the Future of Everything You Hold Dear
IN EVERY PRESIDENTIAL campaign since Roe v. Wade, the Democratic nominee has ominously intoned that the Supreme Court hangs in the balance. “We must win to save the Supreme Court of the United States,” Walter Mondale declared in 1984. “This election is about the Supreme Court,” Al Gore warned 24 hours before the polls closed in 2000. (As it turned out, he was right.) READ MORE >>
Big Chief
Normal 0 false false false EN-US JA X-NONE READ MORE >>
Temple of Silence
Gaming Out a Mixed SCOTUS Decision
As recently as a week ago, everybody watching the Supreme Court seemed convinced of one thing: The justices had made up their minds about the Affordable Care Act. They hadn’t issued a decision and, perhaps, they were fine-tuning the legal arguments they would make in their written opinions. But they knew how they were ruling. They just weren't telling anybody about it. READ MORE >>
Day 2 at the Court: Well, that Could Have Gone Better
My first impression from day two at the Supreme Court: I was more confident yesterday than I am today. With the caveat that I know health policy a lot better than I know law, I can still imagine the justices upholding the individual mandate. But, at this point, I can just as easily imagine them striking it down. READ MORE >>
Day 1 at the Court: No Ducking the Issue
Oral arguments for the Supreme Court on Monday were supposed to be boring. The subject wasn’t the individual mandate, after all. It was the Anti-Injunction Act, a relatively obscure law that prevents courts from hearing legal challenges to taxes until after somebody has paid them. READ MORE >>
