After Birthplace Citizenship Case, The Conservative Legal Movement Needs To Raise Its Standards
In the post-judicial-filibuster world, intellectual adherence to textualism is no longer sufficient for Republican Supreme Court nominees.
In the post-judicial-filibuster world, intellectual adherence to textualism is no longer sufficient for Republican Supreme Court nominees.
Chief Justice Roberts chose to ignore procedural obstacles and move ahead with ruling on the constitutionality of an executive order.
In one ruling, SCOTUS affirmed the president's power to fire independent agency officials. On the same day, it invented a fourth branch of government to protect the Fed.
Trump v. Barbara may come to be remembered not as the final word on birthplace citizenship but as another constitutional detour.
Until surrogacy is treated as a threat to national sovereignty, American citizenship is up for grabs by the highest foreign bidders.
The John Roberts-written ruling on birthplace citizenship marks a chief justice who has sacrificed judicial courage at the altar of comity.
Roberts strips away the bonds that give the concept of 'allegiance' meaning, all while claiming the same concept compels him to do so.
SCOTUS's ruling 'is not only contrary to the original meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment, it produces grotesque results,' Alito wrote.
Roberts reimposed the British system of subjecthood that the founders rejected just before the US is set to celebrate its 250th anniversary.
Justices slammed the historical illiteracy of John Roberts, who imposed a 'medieval English 'feudal' principle' on the American people.