Friday round-up
The health care case remains the principal subject of Supreme Court commentary. In an op-ed for the Chicago Tribune, Geoff Stone argues that “judicial activism is appropriate when there is good reason not to trust the judgment or fairness of the majority” and that “the Affordable Care Act case is a perfect case for judicial restraint.” At CATO@Liberty, Trevor Burrus discusses how questions of deference, liberty, and government power overlap in the health care cases and the Court’s recent decision in Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders. In an op-ed for Forbes, Daniel Shuchman contends that “the ACA oral argument highlights how precarious economic liberty has become under the current consensus of Constitutional interpretation.” Finally, at the Volokh Conspiracy, Randy Barnett discusses why the government’s cost-shifting rationale for the individual mandate has “serious deficiencies” as a “limiting principle.”
Briefly:
- For this blog, Lyle previews Dorsey v. United States and Hill v. United States, consolidated cases about the application of the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010; he concludes that the very different perspectives outlined in the briefs could mean that “the quality of the oral argument” will prove “critical in framing the response.”
- In The Atlantic, Jack Balkin argues that the President should not run against the Court in the upcoming election; rather, Balkin explains, “it is almost always better for presidents to run around it.”
- In The Nation, Ari Berman outlines “[w]hy the Supreme Court matters” in the upcoming election; at ACSblog, Jeremy Leaming summarizes Berman’s article.
- At Crime and Consequences, Kent Scheidegger reports that a cert. petition was recently filed in Keys v. Obama, a “birther” case; he adds that he “would offer to bet a beer that certiorari will be denied, but maybe there’s something in the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 about that, so [he] won’t.”
- As Kiran noted yesterday, all four current and former female Justices recently attended a ceremony marking the thirtieth anniversary of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s first Term on the Court. Adam Liptak of the New York Times has coverage at that paper’s The Caucus blog, while Alexander Heffner interviews O’Connor for the Washington Post on her efforts to promote civics education.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY