Lochner is deeply rooted in an American legal tradition that protects individual rights from overbearing majorities and entrenched special interests, and the decision showcases what courts can and must do to keep the political branches in check.
Conservatives just love the Constitution -- or at least they say they do. The thing is that they don't seem to have any idea how it works. At least that's a more charitable explanation than saying they don't care how the Constitution works and merely use it as a fig leaf while they undermine the rights it guarantees.
It would be surprising if any member of the Supreme Court would take the King v. Burwell petitioners' wholly unsubstantiated assertions about former Sen. Ben Nelson's critical role in the passage of the Affordable Care Act at face value, particularly in light of his direct and explicit contradiction of those assertions.
If playing politics with the franchise is an unfortunate part of our past, it should be abhorrent to our modern democracy. At the start of a new presidential cycle, one without an incumbent, it is time to call a truce on voting.
The vote to renew CHIP funding is another opportunity for Republicans to influence the U.S. health care system in 2015. Democrats need to have a plan to secure a renewal of the CHIP program "as is" without sacrificing priorities in other areas.
Americans expect and deserve a level playing field every time they seek justice in our courts. Our nation was founded on the principle that public officials possess only delegated (and therefore limited) powers, and they must be held accountable for the responsible exercise of those powers.
Chief Justice John Roberts, the primary proponent of the "expansive" interpretation of money as speech, was shockingly not supportive of this particular display of the First Amendment.
Every census report in the post-Civil Rights Movement era, and the countless Urban League's State of Black America reports show that the inner cities continue to get blacker and browner and poorer, while the suburbs got whiter and wealthier. That trend isn't likely to change.
We have only a few days before Mr. Hill enters the death chamber. His execution will mock the Constitution and our common decency unless the courts intervene, now.
By eliminating the disparate impact provisions of the Fair Housing Act, the Supreme Court would be responsible for putting the lives of women and children who experience domestic violence back into the hands of danger.
I offer a potential outcome on marriage equality when the Supreme Court takes it up this spring: Chief Justice John Roberts joins the majority and writes the decision himself.
Today, in the face of limitless anonymous political donations and dramatically widening inequality, our government is slowly starting to look more like an oligarchy, governed according to the whims of a special few. Thankfully, there are straightforward steps Congress can take right now to reverse this deeply troubling trend.
We began this week by celebrating the 85th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'s birth, but today the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in an important case that could knock down a crucial racial and economic pillar of justice built during the civil rights movement.
On behalf of lgbt youth and adults who feel they have no voice at all, I'm willing to keep stammering and crawling... until I fully find my own voice and learn how to fly.
As we mark the 5th anniversary of the disastrous Supreme Court decision Citizens United vs. FEC, it is worth heeding: Who is Citizens United, and how did they manage to subvert generations of campaign finance laws?
By splitting the question in this way, the Court appears to be saying that state-to-state marriage recognition could be a stand-alone issue under the Constitution, related to but distinct from marriage licensing and creation.