Justice Thomas again shows he’s the Supreme Court’s only consistent originalist
Although Justice Thomas agreed that the protection against excessive fines applies to the states, he was the only member of the court to do so on plausible originalist grounds.
If you want to win a Supreme Court case, it helps to play to “progressive” values
Observe how many of the Left’s ideological buttons the plaintiff’s lawyers pushed: non-profit, recycling, mandatory government fee, poverty, disabilities, environment—and that interminably-overused mantra: community.
Legislative Reapportionment: The Supreme Court Steps Back
This article originally appeared in The American Spectator The Supreme Court recently stepped back from its campaign to impose its political preferences on the states. In Evenwel v. Abbott, the justices held while the U.S. Constitution requires states to apportion their legislatures solely by population, the Constitution does not prescribe a particular way of counting […]
Do the Feds Belong in Indian Adoption Law? (Together with another Natelson citation in the Supreme Court and an acknowledgment of Lisa Morris)
(Note: This is the second of several short commentaries on recent Supreme Court decisions.) There is little more heart-rending than the sorrow of a child. The sorrow of a child—and of her adoptive parents—created one of the Supreme Court’s more compelling cases this term. I was happy to be cited extensively in one of the […]
