Blog

Between 2009 and 2020, Josh published more than 10,000 blog posts. Here, you can access his blog archives.

2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009

Justice Scalia on Confirmation Hearings

April 4th, 2017

Justice Scalia’s dissent in Planned Parenthood v. Casey offers an apt summary on the current state of our Supreme Court confirmation hearings.

Roe fanned into life an issue that has inflamed our national politics in general, and has obscured with its smoke the selection of Justices to this Court, in particular, ever since. And by keeping us in the abortion-umpiring business, it is the perpetuation of that disruption, rather than of any Pax Roeana that the Court’s new majority decrees

What makes all this relevant to the bothersome application of “political pressure” against the Court are the twin facts that the American people love democracy and the American people are not fools. As long as this Court thought (and the people thought) that we Justices were doing essentially lawyers’ work up here – reading text and discerning our society’s traditional understanding of that text – the public pretty much left us alone. Texts and traditions are facts to study, not convictions to demonstrate about. But if in reality, our process of constitutional adjudication consists primarily of making value judgments; if we can ignore a long and clear tradition clarifying an ambiguous text, as we did, for example, five days ago in declaring unconstitutional invocations and benedictions at public high school graduation ceremonies, Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577(1992); if, as I say, our pronouncement of constitutional law rests primarily on value [505 U.S. 833, 1001]   judgments, then a free and intelligent people’s attitude towards us can be expected to be (ought to be) quite different. The people know that their value judgments are quite as good as those taught in any law school – maybe better. If, indeed, the “liberties” protected by the Constitution are, as the Court says, undefined and unbounded, then the people should demonstrate, to protest that we do not implement their values instead of ours. Not only that, but the confirmation hearings for new Justices should deteriorate into question-and-answer sessions in which Senators go through a list of their constituents’ most favored and most disfavored alleged constitutional rights, and seek the nominee’s commitment to support or oppose them. Value judgments, after all, should be voted on, not dictated; and if our Constitution has somehow accidentally committed them to the Supreme Court, at least we can have a sort of plebiscite each time a new nominee to that body is put forward. JUSTICE BLACKMUN not only regards this prospect with equanimity, he solicits it.

Of course, Justice Blackmun’s concluding remarks in Casey are ever-relevant:

In one sense, the Court’s approach is worlds apart from that of THE CHIEF JUSTICE and JUSTICE SCALIA. And yet, in another sense, the distance between the two approaches is short – the distance is but a single vote.

I am 83 years old. I cannot remain on this Court forever, and when I do step down, the confirmation process for my successor well may focus on the issue before us today. That, I regret, may be exactly where the choice between the two worlds will be made.

 

ConLaw Class 22 – Individual Autonomy II

April 4th, 2017

Class 22 – 4/4/17

Individual Autonomy II

The lecture notes are here.

Roe v. Wade

This is Norma McCorvey (“Jane Roe”) protesting outside the Supreme Court in 1989 with her lawyer, Gloria Allred, after arguments in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services.

Norma-McCorvey

mccorvey-3

Here is McCorvey in 1985.

mccorvey-1985

Roe didn’t even make top billing in the Times. LBJ died on decision day.

nytimes

In 1996, McCorvey came out as opposing abortion. She noted that she lied in affidavits submitted to the Supreme Court, and she was never raped, let alone gang raped.

mccorvey-1996

I could not find a full, color photo of the Leutze painting. Here is the best version I could find.

taney3

Here is another portrait of Taney:

Roger_Taney_-_Healy

Planned Parenthood v. Casey

This is Governor Bob Casey of Pennsylvania.

Gonzales v. Carhart

This is Dr. LeRoy Carhart.

This is his clinic in Nebraska.

Prop1 Class 22 – Leaseholds II: Delivery of Possession & Subleases

April 4th, 2017

Class 22 – 4/4/17

Leaseholds II: Delivery of Possession & Subleases

The lecture notes are here.

Guest on the Michael Berry Show to Discuss Trump Incitement Case

April 3rd, 2017

Today “the good professor” joined the Michael Berry Show to discuss the latest case against Donald Trump, involving unlawful incitement to violence. I hope Mr. Smarty Pants did not disappoint. Listen here:

Flashback to May 2016: “Donald Trump’s Constitution of One”

April 3rd, 2017

In May 2016, I penned a lengthy essay in National Review, titled Donald Trump’s Constitution of One. I had largely forgotten about it until I noticed that Eric Posner included it in the syllabus for his class, Trump and the Constitution. I re-read my old work and was struck by the opening paragraph:

On January 20, 2017, Chief Justice John Roberts will administer the oath of office to the 45th president: “I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Donald Trump is utterly unqualified to keep this solemn pledge to our most fundamental law. We know this because in winning the nomination, Trump has already promised that he will knowingly break the law and violate the Constitution.

I did a double-take: my discussion presaged contemporary debates about the significance of the President’s oath, most articulately expressed by Ben Wittes and Quinta Jurecic.

My goal in writing this was to make the constitutional case against Trump based on his position about free speech, the separation of powers, and the rule of law more generally. The notion that courts could utilize a deficient oath to engage in open revolt was far, far from my mind.