Raich Mega-Blog: Summarizing the Opinions
Extensive and detailed summaries of the various opinions have already been posted by Orin Kerr and by Larry Solum. Also, David Bernstein of the Volokh Conspiracy took a short break from his self-imposed blogging exile to post these initial thoughts. And Jack Balkin has also posted some comments.
I hope that Orin and Larry will feel free to reiterate their substantive responses here.
Maybe I’ve missed it, but I haven’t seen an analysis yet that addresses a point raised by Justice Thomas in his dissenting opiniong (section B, bottom of page 15), where he notes:
According to the majority, while courts may set aside whole statutes or provisions, they may not “excise individual applications of a concededly valid statutory scheme.”
Is it just me, or did he just say anyone challenging a law before the Supreme Court must show not that the application is unconstitutional, but the entirety of the law and/or provision itself? I’m not a constitutional scholar, but doesn’t this raise the bar for judicial review a few notches skyward?
Comment by rafuzo — June 6, 2005 @ 3:20 pm