Scalia has a right to believe voting rights are a "perpetuation of racial entitlement" for blacks and Hispanics, but should promote this repellent and biased view on conservative talk radio, not the court.
Congress can work mischief of its own. The Senate can hold up patently qualified nominees interminably. Or a majority of the House of Representatives may disable the Senate from going into "the recess" for no reason other than to preserve the filibustering prerogatives of a Senate minority.
Of course, the Senate is not intended to be a rubber stamp. But stalling nomination votes simply to keep laws from being enforced -- effectively repealing the laws that cannot be enforced without the nominees in place -- is utterly inconsistent with the Senate's proper confirmation role.
The Constitution does not explicitly state that the Supreme Court has the right to review laws and declare them constitutional or not. In fact, the Supreme Court gave themselves this power in Marbury v. Madison.
The Justice Department's release of on Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion regarding President Obama's recess appointments power is a welcome display of public accountability. However one analyzes the bottom line, the opinion is a model of the genre.
Members of Congress have abdicated to the president their constitutional responsibilities because of slavish devotion, staggering constitutional illiteracy, and a vassal-like conviction that the executive branch knows best.
Precisely because Americans are easily distracted -- because, as study after study shows, they are clueless about their rights -- the American governmental scheme is sliding ever closer toward authoritarianism.
Mr. President, the advice you received on how to veto this bill was fatally defective. Yes, some of your predecessors have used this gambit, but it's an affront to the Constitution, it's unnecessary, and it thwarts the separation of powers.
As Obama tasks our independent judiciary with trying more suspected 9/11 terrorists, count me among those who agree with Mayor Giuliani's first position on trying alleged terrorists in US courts: in the yes column
With supporters clamoring for the new president to wipe away Bush-era policies with a stroke of a pen, how can the new president wield his own pen without embracing the Bush assault on constitutionalism?