Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘United States Supreme Court’ Category

My love for all things Supreme Court (United States that is, not Washington State) is unbounded. I’ve read virtually every book written on the Court in the last decade, listen to oral arguments on Oyez.org (more) like most people listen to Katy Perry, and openly admit to getting weak-kneed at the sight or sound of Justice Antonin Scalia. So it was with great pleasure today that I stumbled on what has to be the best blog posting of all time — at least for SCOTUS geeks like me.

It’s two posts actually, authored by a what appears to be a Justice Department lawyer who goes by the appellation “The Cranky Conservative.” It’s called “The ten worst Supreme Court decisions of all-time” (6-10I1-5) and, well, it just must be read, both for its content (perfect) and prose (maybe even better). I got a kick seeing my “favorite” awful case from law school, Wickard v. Filburn, coming in at No. 3 on the list.

I stumbled on this post when I googled “worst court decisions ever” hoping to find some competition for the Washington State Supreme Court’s decision in the Betcha.com case (more). The cases referenced in the CC’s top ten list would certainly give the WSSC’s bad card trick of an opinion a run for its money.

All are quite bad in the reasoning department, especially the ones near the top of the list. But for sheer clumsiness, the WSSC’s opinion tops them all.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

News of President Obama’s nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to replace Justice David Souter on the United States Supreme Court has not been well received in conservative circles. By all indications, Judge Sotomayor appears to be a results-oriented judge who views the judiciary as a super, policy-making legislature — precisely the type of judge conservatives like me abhor.

From where I’m standing, a Justice Sotomayor is a foregone conclusion.

I wonder if that might not be a good thing.

Might she . . .

Might she . . .

Consider the realpolitik of Supreme Court politics — justices sometimes move right or left in reaction to other justices as much as the law itself. In her excellent “Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court,” Jan Crawford Greenburg argued that has historically been the case with justices who were untethered by a distinct judicial philosophy. Justice Blackmun moved left because of his antipathy for the unpopular Chief Justice Warren Burger. A new Justice Sandra Day O’Connor moved right in the early years because of her distrust for the wily Justice William Brennan, then left again in her later years because of her dislike for Justice Clarence Thomas’ judicial philosophy.

drive him . . .

drive him . . .

Say what you will about Justice David Souter’s predictable liberalism, but there can be no doubt among the intellectually honest that he was a fair-minded, thorough and thoughtful justice. He also seemed like a likable — if slightly quirky — fellow. One need only listen to Supreme Court oral arguments on oyez.org to discern that. Justice Souter’s reliable presence on the left could have only attracted the philosophy-free O’Connors and Kennedys.

closer to them . . .

closer to them . . .

O’Connor’s gone now, so Kennedy is the only justice left unburdened by a distinct judicial philosophy to guide him.

A Justice Sotomayor may very well guide him — to the right.

or even THEM?

or even THEM?

From her speeches and the few words she muttered in accepting President Obama’s nomination, she does not strike me as a particularly likable gal. She appears to be an unabashed, results-oriented jurist — not a trait likely to appeal to Kennedy, who prides himself on endeavoring to decide cases on their merits. Fellow Clinton appointee Jose Cabranes criticized her one-paragraph opinion in Ricci v. DeStefano because it “contain(ed) no reference whatsoever to the constitutional claims at the core of (the) case” and its “perfunctory disposition rests uneasily with the weighty issues presented by this appeal.” (More.) That’s judge-speak for “you gotta be kidding me” and suggests that Judge Sotomayor may not have been particularly well respected by her Second Circuit colleagues. Judge Sotomayor’s JLo-ish “just a girl from the Bronx” schtick may not wear well with Kennedy, who, by all accounts, perceives himself as quite the Aristocrat. Of her five Second Circuit decisions that have been reviewed by the Supreme Court, she has garnered just 11 of a possible 44 votes (more), so she doesn’t appear to be particularly persuasive, either. And at the risk of sounding mean, she isn’t likely to draw Justice Kennedy on the basis of her dashing good looks. (A Justice Granholm, on the other hand . . . )

Most commentators agree that a Sotomayor-for-Souter swap won’t alter the balance of the court much. I’m not so sure. The balance may tip. Just not in the direction President Obama would like.

Read Full Post »

I just stumbled on a website called Oyez.org. Basically it looks like its all things United States Supreme Court. The best feature — audios of the oral arguments going back who knows how far. I listened to Kelo and Heller last night — better than 99% of TV any day.

Now you can sit in bed listening to Justice Scalia shred his opponents on your iPhone.

Now you can sit in bed listening to Justice Scalia shred his opponents on your iPhone.

Read Full Post »