I have an article up at the Prospect on the hot new trend in arguments that policies that Republicans supported until Obama started supporting them represent a massive threat to liberty and the Constitution: if the Supreme Court upholds the mandate, the broccoli tyrants will...
“federalism”
Having discussed the limitations of positivist political science, I attempt to figure it out using my highly sophisticated "educated guess" method. Although it's a "sovereign immunity" case and not a.
I remember when I used to joke about Republicans bringing back Hammer v.Dagenhart. [Update: more explanation here.] Senator Mike Lee provides the punchline himself. It's worth mentioning here that, Lee's claims.
The proposed amendment that would allow 2/3rds of the states to repeal federal legislation is getting a surprising amount of attention. A few points: What would we be without wishful thinking: "Randy E. Barnett, a law professor at Georgetown who helped draft the amendment, argued...
Megan McArdle apparently believes she has liberals who support broad federal powers dead to rights: 1) Can Congress enact a $50,000 tax on second term abortions? 2) Can Congress enact.
Radley Balko asks: Putting aside what’s codified Bill of Rights, which was ratified after the main body of the Constitution, do you believe the Constitution puts any restrictions on the.
Shorter Phillip Klein: If the Supreme Court decides to uphold the ACA, giving the federal government "broad new powers" to regulate the national economy that it has had since 1942, we need a constitutional convention! What I enjoy most about reading this kind of thing...
In fairness, when it comes to trusting states to administer important federal social programs, what could possibly go wrong?
I've seen in several places that Souter, while an admirable justice, didn't produce a lot of memorable quotes. I suppose this is true. But his coruscating demolitions of the Rehnquist.