I’ve never read an editorial at The Lancet this furious:
Here’s the thing: the man after whom the landmark Supreme Court decision striking down state laws restricting marriage to a man and a woman is named is not indulging in hyperbole:
Supreme Court decisions, like essays written for an English class, reflect the will, prejudices, and desires of their writers. Justices have reactions to cases, then ask their clerks to find the precedents.
Cruelty and caprice are bedfellows, hence the ravenous appetite for random targets. Reluctant to attack gay and lesbian relatives until Obergefell becomes the Sinister Six’s next disemboweling, conservatives have turned to trans men and women.
The situation in Florida (the state with the prettiest name!) continues to wither if citizens don’t belong to a governing majority that despises public education but would support shipping their teething child to Siberia at six months if men could get pregnant. HB 1557, which wants to ensure elementary schools ignore the pleas of gay,Continue reading “The expanding attack on queer Americans”
I love reading biographical horrors like this about Ginni Thomas because I couldn’t make up the density of detail on my own without readers accusing me of luridness:
I’m not a lawyer, but I play one on HTV. It’s my understanding that federal agencies have broad enough mandates to anticipate public health crises and situations requiring swift action because Congress, rightly, cannot predict their occurrences. Seeing an opportunity to undue an administrative state with roots in the Great Society and New Deal, ChiefContinue reading “The ‘nihilism’ and ‘armchair epidemiology’ of the Supreme Court majority”
I don’t deny “education” excited Virginians last Tuesday evening because for many Americans “education” is synonymous with “employment office,” which is to say, a diploma signifies the ability to land meaningful employment. A “good school” is a place where parents can boast about their ability to send or pay for the school or to useContinue reading “Life in these United States: on critical gun theory”
Two quotes from people with a stake in how the Supreme Court abrogated its judicial responsibilities last night by siding with Texas in the abortion case:
I did not go to an Ivy League school. Millions of graduates from respectable community colleges possess an empathy and moral imagination — both are synonymous — greater than Samuel Alito, associate justice of the Supreme Court. His remarks to the Federalist Society this week depended on the infringement on his right to use federalContinue reading “Sam Alito, GOP hack”
In a typically literate, measured, and comprehensive column, Jamelle Bouie explains what the battle over the Supreme Court means for our constitutional rule — a battle, he writes, “taking place in the context of minority rule and incipient democratic failure.”
I’m no lawyer but have always shown interest in the Supreme Court as an institution: its history, personalities, decisions. Not immune to appropriating the language of their enemies, liberals annoy me when they decry “judicial activism” or conservatives when they regard a political document written over two centuries ago as inviolate. Isn’t it funny howContinue reading “The nonsense of originalism”