There will be no solution to the combat over "judicial activism" since the sin exists in the eye of the beholder and everyone knows it when they see it.
Though I'm a bit embarrassed to admit I had never heard of Clay V. United States, I suspect I'm one of the millions-strong target audience that Muhammad Ali's Greatest Fight is aiming to educate.
Very few folks get left out except renewable electricity producers like wind. So everyone has skin in this game. So where does that leave industry and the EPA?
This decision raises no plausible question about EPA's authority to do so. Quite to the contrary, the agency has now overcome the last remaining hurdle -- the upholding of the endangerment finding -- on its way to robustly regulated greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.
Yale Law School election and constitutional law professor Heather Gerken joined Moyers & Company for an interview in which she warns us that McCutcheon will further erode campaign finance regulations
As the government budget gridlock grinds on, there has been considerable attention concerning its financial impact. However, few commentators have focused on the effect the sequester and the government shutdown are having on our constitutional obligation to do justice.
At a small gathering in Los Angeles recently, Miles Rapoport, president of the 13-year-old progressive think tank Demos, expressed optimism about the ...
While there's certainly plenty of finger pointing to go around, few of them have been pointed in the right direction. This isn't President Obama's shutdown or John Boehner's shutdown -- it's Citizens United's.
The place for activism is in politics, in the streets, and on the Internet, but not in the courts. That brings us to the question of how to mitigate judicial activism.
As the government shutdown continues, the Supreme Court began its new term this week and justices heard arguments in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission. The case has been billed as the successor to the court's Citizens United decision.
Before the U.S. Supreme Court today, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli Jr. vigorously defended the current overall cap on political contributions as a tool that helps prevent corruption and the appearance of corruption.
I attended today's U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in the case challenging contribution limits. If the Justices rewrite campaign finance law by striking down the contribution limits, checks of up to $2.95 million each from wealthy contributors will corrupt democracy.
Shaun McCutcheon wants to make political donations to federal candidates. Allow me to clarify: McCutcheon wants to make a lot of political donations to federal candidates. The Republican National Committee, among others, wants him to be able to do so. So what's the problem?
Welcome to the age of government shutdowns, $7 billion elections, and a blatantly pay-to-play Congress with the lowest approval rating of all time at just 10 percent.
Blacks, Latinos, Native Americans, Asians, women, gays and other marginalized groups have fought long and hard to level the playing field and bring about change. While we have many more challenges ahead of us, we have made tremendous gains.
Will we finally see the umpire that the Chief Justice promised us? Or will he continue to move the foul lines and alter the strike zone to favor the rich and the powerful? Americans should keep their eyes on the Court.