How Scalia's Beliefs Completely Changed the Supreme Court
September 09, 2014
With 28 years on the bench, his beliefs have seeped into nearly ever aspect of federal law.
Scalia's Epic Blunder Exposes His Partisan Hackery
May 01, 2014
Antonin Scalia screwed up big time, and seemingly every elite American law scholar is completely aghast.In the course of dissenting against the six-justice majority, which affirmed the EPA's authority to regulate coal emissions that cross state lines
Moneyball for Judges
April 10, 2013
How can we learn how political judges' decisions are? By looking at the statistics.
The Justices Need Economics 101
March 28, 2012
The conservative justices' questioning about the health care law on Tuesday may or may not have betrayed a political bias. But it most certainly betrayed an ignorance of health economics. Henry Aaron, the Brookings economist who has been filing daily dispatches from the hearings, wrote about some of them: Several of the justices, notably Scalia and Alito, responded to the externalities argument by saying that every economic transaction creates similar externalities. "If I don't buy a Volt, I raise the price of Volts," said Scalia. Alito said much the same thing.
Will Justice Prevail on Health Care?
February 08, 2011
Laurence Tribe of Harvard Law School has an op-ed in the New York Times that carries the headline, “On Health Care, Justice Will Prevail.” It’s true to the content of the article, which predicts that the Affordable Care Act will survive constitutional challenges. But I’m not sure Tribe fully believes that. In fact, the whole article reads to me like a warning to the justices of the Supreme Court—one, I certainly hope, they will heed. The case against the Act’s individual mandate, Tribe suggests, is incredibly weak.
Confused by the Stem Cell Ruling? We Were Too.
August 26, 2010
U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth threw embryonic stem cell research into chaos Monday when he ruled that federal funding for the research was illegal. Citizen Cohn talked to Nina Mendelson, a professor of administrative law at the University of Michigan Law School. Here’s a condensed and edited version of our interview: AH: On what merits did Judge Lamberth overturn embryonic stem cell research funding? NM: The plaintiffs argued that the new National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding guidelines were illegal because of the Dickey-Wicker amendment, an appropriations rider.
Living Without Stevens
April 21, 2010
Tom Goldstein is a partner at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, and lecturer at Stanford and Harvard Law Schools. He is the founder of SCOTUSblog. A version of this piece was originally posted there on April 18, 2010. Supreme Court retirements inevitably produce much more coverage of process than substance. The press is dominated by political rather than legal reporters. Politics is also more familiar and therefore more accessible to the public than are court decisions. The irony is that this attention to process is not very meaningful—at least at this stage, when there is no nominee.
June 16, 2007
Jeffrey Rosen on Anthony Kennedy's moralistic tendencies.
The Age of Mixed Results
June 28, 1999
One Case at a Time: Judicial Minimalism on the Supreme Court by Cass R. Sunstein (Harvard University Press, 290 pp., $29.95) I. America now is a society addicted to legalism that has lost its faith in legal argument. The impeachment of Bill Clinton was only the most visible manifestation of this paradox.
July 28, 1997
Since the Progressive era, this magazine has argued for judicial restraint as part of a broader argument for liberal nationalism. Judges should defer to the prerogatives of Congress and the president, the argument goes, so that popular sovereignty can serve as the engine of national unity.