Since when is the Supreme Court in the business of going beyond constitutionality to mind-reading as to why bureaucrats devise policies that are constitutional?
CNN legal analyst Joan Biskupic’s biography of Chief Justice John Roberts, ‘The Chief,’ is so preoccupied with disagreeing with the man that it doesn’t provide much insight into Roberts’s life and rulings.
Maybe ‘Obamacare’ should be renamed ‘Robertscare’ for the justice who went out of his way to save the individual mandate.
In the feud between President Trump and Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, both are wrong. Judges aren’t partisan hacks, but they do have different approaches to jurisprudence.
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts’ attempt to defend the independence of the judiciary, in light of President Trump’s comments that courts are politicized, did more harm than good.
Georgetown Law Professor Randy Barnett joins Federalist Radio to discuss the pros and cons of a potential Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
There is literally nothing in his record that justifies the smears and demagoguery he’s about to face.
If judges are a vindication of Trump, are they also a vindication of Mitch McConnell? And if so, does a good Supreme Court really compensate for a lousy Congress?
The plaintiffs in Trump v. Hawaii would have the Supreme Court invent a principle that the president’s powers are reduced when he says nasty things.
The ruling reaffirms the president’s broad power to restrict access to the country on national security grounds granted by the Immigration and National Security Act.
The Supreme Court has taken a constitutional provision intended to limit government power and turned it into a mandate for unlimited government power.
Liberals argue that it’s time to raise the mandate ‘tax’ to compel holdouts to participate. Once again, Obamacare’s imaginary tax becomes a penalty.
If I have to point to a moment that spawned the current annus horribilis, it would have to be John Roberts’s vindication of Obamacare on June 28, 2012.
If we understand the history of Supreme Court appointments, we can understand that there is really no such thing as a ‘moderate’ Supreme Court nominee.
In the few weeks since Antonin Scalia’s death, we are witnessing an unchecked liberal Supreme Court quartet.
Progressive legal circles have warmly received Chief Justice John Roberts’ Obergefell v. Hodges dissent. That’s a problem.
After last week’s ruling, the Supreme Court is now fully, openly a political institution.
Read Chief Justice John Roberts make quick work of people who think words mean what they say.
The Supreme Court ruling in King v. Burwell affirms a philosophy of governance fundamentally at odds with the meaning and purpose of the U.S. Constitution.
- Latest Development In Flynn Case Proves Special Counsel Was A Cover For Taking Down TrumpHis former lawyer’s latest testimony establishes two continue reading >
- Here’s Your Guide To The Latest Wild Developments With Michael FlynnIn the escalating dispute between government attorneys continue reading >
- Dissent Can Be Patriotic, But Hating Your Own Country Isn’tThe grand question of our time may very well be the simcontinue reading >