Tagged Constitutional Law

Democrats Should Hold the Gorsuch Nomination Hostage

Judge Neil Gorsuch is a genuinely outstanding jurist, who would be a superb addition to the United States Supreme Court. All Americans can and should be deeply proud that his intellect, his devotion to scholarship, and his fidelity to original public meaning jurisprudence has brought him to this extraordinary moment in his career and his life. I greatly respect his ability, his jurisprudential philosophy, and his character, which by all accounts is beyond reproach. I suppose this sounds as though I am putting aside my Never-Trumpism for a moment and supporting the Trump administration in its nomination of Judge Gorsuch.…

Merrick Garland and the United States Supreme Court

Before getting into the meat of this post, let me state the following: The president of the United States has every right to nominate someone to the United States Supreme Court, despite the fact that this is an election year. The United States Senate has every right not to act on the nomination, and no constitutional obligation whatsoever to actually hold hearings or have a vote. The above having been written, I believe that the United States Senate should–barring the revelation of any skeletons in Merrick Garland’s closet–confirm his nomination as an associate justice of the United States. Here is…

Thoughts and Clarifications on the Issue of Same-Sex Marriage

In the aftermath of last week’s Supreme Court ruling on Obergefell, I have engaged in some online debates with people of goodwill regarding the issue of same-sex marriage. I expect that those debates will continue for some time to come, but in the event that it is useful, here is a comprehensive outline regarding where I stand regarding the issue:

Quote of the Day

Notwithstanding the paranoid fantasies of some religious conservatives, no church or clergy in the United States will be compelled to perform same-sex marriages, any more than they are compelled to perform remarriages or interreligious marriages. Neither will religious teachings about sexuality and marriage be penalized; Kennedy’s opinion reaffirms this obvious point. Kennedy moreover steps away from his previous tendency to say that opposition to homosexuality is nothing but an irrational animus; that view would tend to get in the way of thinking about the just freedom of members of religious groups that oppose same-sex marriage. But there remain live questions…

The Supreme Court Bats .500. Legal and Political Analysis Follows.

The United States Supreme Court has come out with two major opinions, in as many days. The first concerned Barack Obama’s health care law, and featured a bad outcome based on poor reasoning. The second concerned the issue of same-sex marriage and featured a laudable outcome based on less-than-good reasoning.

Social Media: Not the Place to Go for Sober-Headed Legal Analysis

There has been a lot of debate about the letter sent by 47 Republican senators to the Iranian regime regarding the negotiations over nuclear energy use–likely for weapons–by Iran. I happen to think that sending the letter was a bad idea; foreign policy has been found to be the province of the executive branch, with a few exceptions, and I generally don’t like it when people of either party freelance in opposition to any White House when it comes to foreign policy–even if I disapprove of the White House’s foreign policy. But while it is one thing to disapprove of…

Our Very Wise and Poorly Implemented New Immigration Policy

In reacting to President Obama’s recent speech on immigration, I find myself in the same position as Ilya Shapiro; I commend the president on a truly excellent, much-needed policy change, while deploring the way in which the change is being implemented. Like Shapiro, I cannot get past the fact that previously, the president swore up and down that he did not have the authority to put into effect the changes that he is now putting into effect. To be sure, there are legal justifications for the president’s position–see Ilya Somin on that issue. But let there be absolutely no mistake that…

Blog Post Title of the Day

“Money Rules Elections–Except When It Doesn’t.” Read the whole thing. I guess it’s too much to think that people who believe Citizens United is destroying the fabric of Western Civilization will reconsider their beliefs upon reading Walter Olson’s post. But hope springs eternal.

What Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Doesn’t Know about Corporate Law and the First Amendment

Stephen Bainbridge takes the young Kennedy to task for pretending that corporations can somehow be given some kind of “death penalty” for not agreeing with Kennedy’s views on climate policy. Of course, to say that Professor Bainbridge has forgotten more about corporate law than the young Kennedy will ever learn is to understate matters (and you should really read through both of the professor’s blog posts in order to get a sense of just how entirely overmatched the young Kennedy is), but there is another matter worth exploring as well when it comes to this particular debate. Consider the following quote…