A very funny map from Very Small Array. District of Columbia v. Heller is the one Supreme Court case on the list. Thanks to Gizmodo and InstaPundit for the pointer. UPDATE: Changed to credit Very Small Array, which is apparently the original author. Thanks to commenter Dan for pointing out where credit was due.
Archive | 2010
UNICEF harms children
International Adoption: The Human Rights Position is an article in Global Policy by Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Bartholet. A response article from Paulo Barrozo of Boston College Law School amplifies some of her points. In brief: UNICEF has been at the forefront of pressuring national governments to set up so many hurdles as to make international adoption rare and […]
“Kerr’s Inconsistent Positivism”: A Response to Sandefur
Over at Freespace, former VC guest-blogger Tim Sandefur argues that I am guilty of “inconsistent positivism” in two series of posts I have written. In the first set of posts, I argued that existing commerce clause doctrine can be used to support the constitutionality of the individual mandate. In the second series of posts, I […]
Assessing the Very Limited Impact of McDonald and Heller on Gun Regulations
By Ilya Somin on December 6, 2010 6:36 pm in Constitutional Theory, Guns, McDonald v. City of Chicago
When the Supreme Court for the first time recognized the existence of an individual right to bear arms in District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008, I warned that the decision might well end up giving gun owners very little new protection against regulation: The Supreme Court may have endorsed an individual right under the […]
Jonathan Rauch on Gay Rights and the Rights of Opponents of Homosexuality
A very interesting and thoughtful article, in The Advocate, from a leading supporter of same-sex marriage rights. Here’s an excerpt: [Gay rights opponents] have developed a narrative that goes like this: Gay rights advocates don’t just want legal equality. They want to brand anyone who disagrees with them, on marriage or anything else, as the […]
Philadelphia 1787 was not a runaway convention
So explains my Independence Institute colleague Rob Natelson, on his Our American Constitution blog. Forty-eight of the 55 delegates had instructions which allowed them to go beyond amending the Articles of Confederation. Rob’s research into early American history has found that constitutional conventions (for a new constitution, or to amending an existing document) had well-established […]
Congratulations to Josh Blackman & His Blog
The most recent issue of the ABA Journal includes its 4th Annual listing of “Our 100 Favorite Blawgs.” (You can vote for your 12 favorites if you register.) Included in the “Court Watch” category is Josh Blackman’s Blog. Here is what they say: Josh Blackman’s Blog is an almost daily fix for constitutional la junkies. […]
The new Spanish letter: @
In Spanish, there are many nouns which end in a “o” if referring to a male, and “a” if referring to a female. For example: chico/chica (child), maestro/maestra (teacher), hijo/hija (son/daughter). The nouns are pluralized with an “s”. So a group of boys is “chicos”; and a group of girls is “chicas”. In a mixed […]
9th Circuit Oral Argument in SSM Case
You can watch it now live at C-Span.
Supreme Court Relist Watch
A bunch of new relists today, and the beat goes on for the group of perennial favorites. PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing, 09-993/ Actavis Elizabeth LLC v. Mensing, 09-1039, CA8, present the question whether the Eighth Circuit abrogated the Hatch-Waxman Amendments by allowing state tort liability for failure to warn in direct contravention of the statute’s […]
“Constitutional Tinkering”
How about the 11th, 18th, 22nd, and 27th Amendments, all of which I think are generally considered “conservative” in nature. More generally, I perceive no “conservative” bias against “constitutional tinkering.” In fact, it seems to me that it is implicit in conservative jurisprudence that conservatives should favor more constitutional amendments, simply because they are less […]
Global Warming Goes Back to Court
This morning the Supreme Court accepted certiorari in American Electric Power v. Connecticut, a case in which several states and environmental groups alleged that greenhouse gas emissions from several large utilities constitute actionable contributions to the public nuisance of global warming. This case has potentially broad implications for continuing climate change litigation in federal courts […]
Reminder Truth on the Market Blog Symposium on Behavioral Law and Economics Starts Today
Check it out.
Lithwick’s History
Lithwick: Traditionally (and what is conservatism if not respect for tradition?) conservatives have railed against “Constitutional tinkering,” while progressives have proposed all manner of amendments—some successful (women’s suffrage), others not (equal rights for women), still others, well, a bit unserious (a ban on “war for any purpose”) Actually, support for women’s suffrage didn’t break down […]
Dahlia Lithwick Endorses Originalist Vision of Federalism, Er, Not Really
I’m generally pretty skeptical about constitutional amendments, for a bunch of reasons. But writing in Slate, Dahlia Lithwick and Jeff Shesol offer a rather strange argument against the so-called “Repeal Amendment,” Randy Barnett’s idea to amend the Constitution to permit 2/3 of states to overturn federal laws. The argument: The Framers of the Constitution were […]