iOS app Android app

Judicial Review

Yes, Judges Should Invalidate Irrational Legislation: A Reply to Greg Weiner

Evan Bernick | Posted 08.03.2016 | Politics
Evan Bernick

The American Constitution has been called "the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man." It was authored by men who had surpassing confidence in the human mind--men who were convinced that people were capable of "establishing good government from reflection and choice," to the end that self-evident truths about human nature, discernible through reason, would be honored in social life.

Against Narrow and Hidebound Originalism: On Peruta v. San Diego and the Right to Armed Self-Defense

Evan Bernick | Posted 06.22.2016 | Politics
Evan Bernick

Predictions of originalism's impending demise may have been premature--at least when it comes to the Second Amendment. What Professor Randy Barnett ha...

Bad Faith or Bad Principle? On Chief Justice Roberts, the Affordable Care Act and Judicial Restraint

Evan Bernick | Posted 05.10.2016 | Politics
Evan Bernick

Judges who draw their power from Article III have a duty to exercise independent judgment in interpreting the meaning of the Constitution and the meaning of subordinate enactments.

Senate Obstruction Is No Way To Mark Anniversary of Marbury v. Madison

Thomas A. Saenz | Posted 02.26.2017 | Politics
Thomas A. Saenz

Decided on February 24, 1803, Marbury, which established the Court's power to declare laws unconstitutional, is ordinarily the first or second Supreme Court decision taught to law school students.

Yes, The Fourteenth Amendment Protects Unenumerated Rights: A Response to Kurt Lash

Evan Bernick | Posted 07.13.2016 | Politics
Evan Bernick

It is arguably the most important question concerning judicial review today. Should judges require the government to offer an honest, reasoned explanation every time it restricts individual liberty, or just some of the time?

The Kansas Education Funding Case and Constitutional Democracy

Craig Martin | Posted 03.18.2015 | Politics
Craig Martin

The ongoing debate in Kansas over school funding is important not only for the state's education policy, but also for how we think about our democracy.

Silence in the Court! Why the Supreme Court Often Says Nothing

Harlow Giles Unger | Posted 12.31.2014 | Politics
Harlow Giles Unger

What many Americans often forget is that the Constitution has less to do with their rights than the rights of government.

Self-inflicted Wounds: New Alaska Laws Reject Statehood

John Aronno | Posted 08.26.2013 | Politics
John Aronno

The signing of these bills into law is the closest any state has come to seceding. One resolution went so far as to urge the federal government to "recede." We have officially adopted laws asserting autonomy and authority over the union of which we are a part, to which we pledge allegiance to.

"Poor Alaskans": Court Blasts Alaska's Redistricting

John Aronno | Posted 08.03.2013 | Politics
John Aronno

The last round of reapportionment in Alaska didn't meet any rational smell check. The heavily right-leaning redistricting board focused on pitting political rivals against each other and erected new obstacles for left-leaning candidates and incumbents in their home districts.

A Giant Step Backward for Voters in Nevada and Beyond

Yousef Abukhdair | Posted 10.23.2012 | Politics
Yousef Abukhdair

A "none of the above" voting option allows Americans to articulate their disappointment with individual candidates and political parties while still being actively involved in the political process. States should be expanding this option, not eliminating it.

The Supreme Court Needs Fixing

Jess Coleman | Posted 09.04.2012 | Teen
Jess Coleman

After Marbury v. Madison, the Court went from the least significant branch to the most significant, reserving the right to overturn any law, regardless of popular support or precedent.

Will SCOTUS Abandon Gitmo?

Daphne Eviatar | Posted 07.23.2012 | Politics
Daphne Eviatar

The Supreme Court is expected to decide as soon as Thursday whether it will hear the Latif v. Obama and possibly restore a right to meaningful judicial review for detainees imprisoned in the name of the "war on terror."

Conservative Scholar: Supreme Court Should Uphold Obamacare

The Huffington Post | Mike Sacks | Posted 04.16.2012 | Politics

Yet another prominent conservative legal scholar has stepped forward to urge the Supreme Court to uphold health care reform as firmly within the court...

Reviewing Judicial Review

Jess Coleman | Posted 06.13.2012 | Teen
Jess Coleman

Judicial review is something the court ought to hold in its back pocket, only to be pulled out when a threat to our nation's integrity occurs. It is not, and was never intended to be, a litmus test for every piece of legislation.

The Supreme Court Has Forgotten History

Jess Coleman | Posted 06.11.2012 | Teen
Jess Coleman

Striking down the Affordable Care Act will only leave millions on the street without health care, and hand over the power of those who were elected to those who were appointed.

Let's Talk About Impeaching Supreme Court Justices

Nathan Newman | Posted 06.05.2012 | Politics
Nathan Newman

Progressives need to get over their recent attachment to the courts as an institution and recognize that unelected judges have overwhelmingly been the enemy of civil rights and economic justice in this nation.

Mike Sacks

Eric Holder Backs Up President's Supreme Court Comments

HuffingtonPost.com | Mike Sacks | Posted 04.05.2012 | Politics

WASHINGTON -- Continuing the politically charged back-and-forth between the executive and judicial branches over President Barack Obama's health care ...

Health Care, Immigration, and Voting: The Supreme Court and Judicial Power

Eric Segall | Posted 03.11.2012 | Politics
Eric Segall

The Arizona immigration case may or may not raise difficult issues of statutory interpretation but it raises no question of judicial activism, no matter how the case comes out.

Gingrich And The Constitution

Bennett L. Gershman | Posted 02.20.2012 | Politics
Bennett L. Gershman

Gingrich's attack on the judiciary -- he would abolish courts that issued wrong-headed opinions, force judges to explain their rulings, cut funding for courts and impeach more judges -- is egotistical bluster.

Gingrich and a Weaker Court: Focusing on the Idea Not the Man

Eric Segall | Posted 02.19.2012 | Politics
Eric Segall

Although I would never vote for Newt Gingrich and find many of his political views distasteful, his ideas about the Supreme Court should be taken seriously.

Jurists' Personal Lives Should Remain So

Fred Silberberg | Posted 02.08.2012 | Politics
Fred Silberberg

Since when we have ever required judges to disclose the details of the personal lives in such a manner? On what basis does one's sexual orientation affect his or her ability to determine the legality of matters?

Judging Sonia: In Defense of Judicial Activism and a Wise Latina

Arlene M. Roberts | Posted 05.25.2011 | Politics
Arlene M. Roberts

What is the role or expectation of a justice on the Supreme Court? An adherent of precedent? A policy maker? And just how did judicial activism garner such a tarnished reputation?

Proposition 8 Belongs Before California's Supreme Court

Carey Alexander | Posted 05.25.2011 | Politics
Carey Alexander

Beyond the core issues surrounding Proposition 8 lies a far deeper question affecting the very nature of our democracy: Can the court review laws?