Our "new" troll Fred Jones "unhinged liberal" has managed to distill every idiotic argument commonly seen about anti-Roe countermobilization into one comment! Just for fun, let's go through every fallacy one at a time:Issues that are decided in this manner do us no good because...
countermobilization
Oh, and to add to what Matt says here one interesting thing about the panel is that Rosen immediately conceded that while the quality of legal craftsmanship may be normatively.
The conference was really good; I strongly recommend it if you're interested in such things. I was on a panel about anti-judicial backlash with the Reva Seigel, Robert Post, Roger.
To follow up on Matt and Ezra, another angle to run at it from is to apply the logic to the civil rights movement. If one takes the Rauch/Brownstein argument seriously, wasn't it also wrong to "federalize" the divisive issue of segregation? Of course, they...
I have an article up at TAP about the recent rejection of an anti-gay constitutional amendment in Massachusetts and its implications for claims that using litigation is a counterproductive strategy..
The Massachusetts legislature has rejected the proposed constitutional amendment calling for the revocation of gay and lesbian marriage rights and the restoration of bigotry by a 151-45 vote. It should.
Charles Krauthammer, taking one of the laziest column ideas off the shelf, is the umpteenth nominally pro-choice wealthy male columnist to argue that Roe should be overturned and that this would end most of the conflict about abortion in the United States. The problem with...
Speaking of nominal supporters of gay rights and specious backlash arguments, you may remember that in the wake of the New Jersey civil unions ruling Glenn Reynolds said that "changes.
In response to my point that Mickey Kaus's nominal support for gay marriage was empty because he never finds any means of achieving it acceptable (the only meaningful difference between.