Professor David Dow of the University of Houston argues that Supreme Court justices should be impeached if the individual mandate is struck down because “Supreme Court justices who undermine the principles of the Constitution ought to be impeached.” According to Professor Dow, the case for impeachment would not be based solely on the Court’s health […]
Author Archive | Jonathan H. Adler
Ruth Marcus on the President vs. The Court
The Washington Post‘s Ruth Marcus supports the President’s health care reform law and believes the individual mandate is constitutional. She further believes that a decision striking down the mandate would be seen as overtly political and would be bad for both the country and the Court. Nontheless, she was quite dismayed by the President’s recent […]
Professor Dorf Takes Jeffrey Toobin Back to School
In a recent column, Jeffrey Toobin of The New Yorker criticized Judge Brett Kavanaugh of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit for a footnote in his Seven-Sky v. Holder opinion noting that “the President may decline to enforce a statute that regulates private individuals when the President deems the statute unconstitutional, even if […]
The President vs. the Court
By Jonathan H. Adler on April 2, 2012 9:27 pm in Federalism, Health Care, Individual Mandate, Supreme Court
At a joint press conference today with President Calderon of Mexico, and Prime Minister Harper of Canada, President Obama was asked whether, in light last week’s oral arguments, he was concerned the Supreme Court might strike down the individual mandate or other portions of his health care reform law. According to the White House transcript, […]
Court Takes Takings Case
Among this morning’s cert grants was Arkansas Game & Fish Commission v. United States, which asks whether temporary yet repeated flooding can constitute a compensable taking under the Fifth Amendment. I blogged about this case last week here.
Buffett’s Mea Culpa
Paul Caron reports that Warren Buffett has issued a “mea culpa” for arguing for a tax reform — the so-called “Buffett Rule” — that would not meaningfully increase his taxes. To make amends, he is launching the “tax it forward” movement to encourage wealthy individuals like himself to voluntarily pay more money to the U.S. […]
Was Hamdan Based on a Mistake?
Ben Wittes had this interesting post on the Lawfare blog about research by Haridimos V. Thravalos suggesting the Hamdan plurality got its history wrong concerning whether conspiracy could be tried as a war crime. See also this response from Kevin Jon Heller and Wittes’ rejoinder.
EPA Forced to Backtrack on Fracking Contamination Claims
The WSJ notes that the EPA has had to backtrack and reevaluate allegations that hydraulic fracturing has been responsible for environmental contamination. On Friday, the agency told a federal judge it withdrew an administrative order that alleged Range Resources Corp. had polluted water wells in a rural Texas county west of Fort Worth. Under an agreement […]
Federal Judge Voids Part of WI Collective Bargaining Reform
The Journal-Sentinel reports that a federal district court judge has struck down parts of the controversial Wisconsin law that limits the collective bargaining rights of public sector unions. Seven major public employee unions had challenged the fact that Act 10 dramatically narrowed what could be bargained by general public employee unions, and required those unions […]
No More Recess Appointments
The Hill reports that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has promised Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell that there will be no more recess appointments made by the President during Congress’ next adjournment.
Why Did Legal Elites Underestimate the Case Against the Mandate?
By Jonathan H. Adler on March 30, 2012 11:53 am in Academia, Health Care, Individual Mandate, Supreme Court
Greg Sargent is one of many commentators wondering “How did legal observers and Obamacare backers get it so wrong?” I think he’s asking the wrong question. A better question to ask is: why did so many expect legal elites to have any particular insight into the current court? After all, many of the legal experts […]
A Takings Claim Even Environmentalists Could Love
By Jonathan H. Adler on March 30, 2012 12:58 am in Just Compensation Clause, Property Rights, Supreme Court
Among the cases up for consideration at the Supreme Court’s conference on Friday is Arkansas Game & Fish Commission v. United States, which seeks review of an interesting takings case out of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In short, the case concerns whether the temporary flooding of property can constitute a […]
Citizens United or Kelo?
In my contribution to the NRO symposium Ilya mentions below I address the claims made by liberal commentators that the Supreme Court would sacrifice its own credibility were it to strike down the individual mandate. Commentators aghast at the possibility that the Court may invalidate a key portion of President Obama’s signature legislative accomplishment have […]
Texas Wins Clean Air Act Fight with EPA
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit sternly rebuked the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for overstepping its statutory authority in rejecting three air pollution control regulations adopted by the state of Texas for their alleged non-conformity with applicable Clean Air Act requirements. In Luminant Generation Company, LLC v. EPA, the Fifth Circuit the […]
Lithwick’s Lament
Shorter Dalhia Lithwick: The mandate must be constitutional because it’s compassionate to care about others. Less short Dalhia Lithwick: The mandate must be constitutional because it’s about the freedom to have the government make sure we take care of each other. Lithwick’s column makes the common mistake of evaluating a measure’s constitutionality based upon the […]