INFLAMMATORY WRIT: An interesting article by David Savage about the military commissions bill signed by the President this week. I have been highly pessimistic about whether the Supreme Court will rule significant parts of the bill unconstitutional. But at least some scholars believe that the Court will not run (to their undying credit): Many legal […]
Scott Lemieux
Scott Lemieux is a political science professor at the University of Washington. He writes for the blog Lawyers, Guns & Money. Follow @lemieuxlgm
THE WAR OF STRATEGIC DEFERRALS.
THE WAR OF STRATEGIC DEFERRALS. An interesting article by Warren Richey about whether the Supremes will “trim” the appalling Military Commissions Act. My guess, as Richey suggests, is that the Court will do pretty much nothing — Justice Kennedy invited Congress to act, and it did. These kinds of interactions between courts and legislatures have […]
VERDICT: STILL HOPELESSLY…
VERDICT: STILL HOPELESSLY ARBITRARY. The Canadian lawblogger Pithlord attempts to answer the (to me, completely unanswerable) question of how advocates of criminalizing abortion can justify excluding women who obtain abortions entirely from criminal sanctions: *Criminalizing something much of a society thinks is permissible is often a mistake, even if that part of society is mistaken […]
WHO CARES WHAT ANTHONY WOULD DO?
WHO CARES WHAT ANTHONY WOULD DO? Amanda Marcotte calls our attention to this excellent piece by Stacy Schiff, who debunks claims that Susan B. Anthony was a supporter of abortion bans. I find it particularly interesting because Anthony was able to ask questions about whether abortion bans actually accomplish anything even if you agree with […]
PARTISAN ARMCHAIR STATISTICIANS:…
PARTISAN ARMCHAIR STATISTICIANS: STILL HACKS. The indefatigable Daniel Davies states in lucid terms what the recent Lancet study means: First, don’t concentrate on the number 600,000 (or 655,000, depending on where you read). This is a point estimate of the number of excess Iraqi deaths – it’s basically equal to the change in the death […]
CAN THIS ARGUMENT…
CAN THIS ARGUMENT BE SAVED? In response to my claim that the exemption of women from punishment under laws banning abortion is fatally incoherent, a commenter here (as a TAPPED commenter did earlier) invokes Ronald Dworkin’s argument that abortion is a “cosmic shame” that nonetheless doesn’t rise to the level of murder. The commenter says: […]
“FEMINISTS” AGAINST WOMEN….
“FEMINISTS” AGAINST WOMEN. Admittedly, when it comes to illogic on the part of supporters of criminalized abortion, the rape and incest exemptions are relatively small potatoes. What really gives away the show is their unwillingness to apply criminal sanctions against women who are allegedly committing something akin to murder. Hack politicians, of course, respond to […]
THE FORCED PREGNANCY…
THE FORCED PREGNANCY JUSTIFICATION THAT DARES NOT SPEAK ITS NAME: Jill Filipovic finds noted crank Bill Napoli arguing that “[i]f you vote to repeal [South Dakota’s unconstitutional abortion ban], you’ll be voting for the death of 800 babies that didn’t have anything to do with rape or incest” and “[i]f you love babies, and see […]
SYMPATHY FOR THE…
SYMPATHY FOR THE SCALIA. The New York Times is running a superb multi-part series about the increasing number of legal privileges and breaks being given to religious institutions, which has generated some attention and commentary. Today’s article about the tax breaks given to religious institutions — even when they involve clearly secular functions like retirement […]
Judged Dred
Dred Scott v. Sandford is the ultimate trump card in constitutional arguments. This infamous case — in which the Supreme Court held that Congress could not regulate slavery in the territories and that African Americans had “no rights the white man is bound to respect” — provides such rhetorically compelling ammunition because everyone today considers […]

