Justice Scalia for the Court, today: 4 The dissent [by Roberts, CJ] compares VOPA’s lawsuit to such indignities as “cannibalism” and “patricide,” since it is a greater “affront to someone’s dignity to be sued by a brother than to be sued by a stranger.” Post, at 9. We think the dissent’s principle of familial affront less than universally applicable, even with respect to real
Popular Posts
-
Williams v. Illinois: bad Confrontation Clause result, but not a major setback: plurality only. Alito writes for plurality. Dissenting coali...
-
Individual mandate okayed as a tax.
-
Beyond what I wrote yesterday about Perry (which now seems improbable in light of Kennedy's blather for the Court in Windsor, and Scalia...
-
My prediction about the outcome was basically right, but I was seriously wrong about, and unfair to, Justice Kennedy. Not only would he stri...
-
Scotusblog dealing with rumors - unsubstantiated and unlikely, TBTG -- that Pres will attend Court session. That could actually raise separa...
-
The mighty Ed Whelan has noticed it too. He also takes on the question: who in fact wrote the "joint dissent"? Ed first floats th...
-
The Wall Street Journal agrees with me -- and explains, better than I did or probably could, exactly why the taxing power discovered in the ...
-
Back now.I. Obamacare and RaichWhile we're watching and analyzing the Obamacare oral arguments, I'll add only this: I see no reason ...
-
The Williams v. Illinois plurality opinion could be subtitled "Trial Judges Never Get Confused." That's certainly an assumptio...
-
Tom Goldstein (Scotusblog): "The bottom line: the entire ACA is upheld, with the exception that the federal government's power to ...