Leftist judicial activists have made calls to add as many as 250 judges between the district and appeals court levels.
After Texas v. Pennsylvania, conservatives must rediscover their opposition to judicial overreach. A Warren Court of the right is not the solution we need.
Whatever newsworthy event Democrats have caused is overshadowed by the fact that Republicans are attacking them for it.
Ben Domenech and Ilya Shapiro discuss the history of contentious court fights and how they transitioned from an insulted political conflict into the public square.
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts is a politician — a politician who consistently makes laws, inconsistently applies the Constitution, and can’t be voted out of office.
“If the Chief Justice believes his political judgment is so exquisite, I invite him to resign, travel to Iowa, and get elected,” Cotton said.
While his opponent hopes to bring her focus on social justice to the state Supreme Court, Justice Dan Kelly wishes to ‘assiduously patrol the borders between the branches.’
Prior court-packing shows the practice can have disastrous, perhaps unforeseen results, and poses potential threats to our civil liberties.
The judiciary’s rulings are not the supreme law of the land, even rulings from the Supreme Court. The judiciary is not the only or even final arbiter on the Constitution.
All too often, lower courts have used a bad legal doctrine to stop states and local governments from protecting the unborn, even when Supreme Court case law would allow it.
In the event Roe gets overturned, it won’t be the win for abortion abolition that pro-lifers claim. We must strategize accordingly.
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.
Even if Brett Kavanaugh turns out to be a tremendous originalist justice, the courts still represent a major threat to the republic.
The idea that the Supreme Court might strike down Obamacare, and that a Justice Kavanaugh would cast the deciding vote to do so, ranges from implausible to ridiculous.
It’s not especially her political apostasy that’s the problem. It’s weakness of her arguments.
Which is worse: An unelected judge opining on how a mandate to purchase a product could meet constitutional muster, or giving Congress instructions on how to ensure it will? Kavanaugh did both.
Striking down the law through legal fiat would represent judicial activism at its worst—asking unelected judges to do what elected members of Congress took great pains to avoid.
The proposal is simple: when Democrats next hold the presidency and Senate, they should pack the courts to ensure that the Left can achieve its goals.
The Oregon Court of Appeals upheld a $135,000 fine against the owners of a local cake shop who declined to use their artistic skills to create a custom cake for a same-sex wedding.
Judges—who typically lack military service and work in courtrooms far removed from its realities—are ill-positioned and ill-qualified to evaluate judgment calls by military leaders.
- Interior Secretary Deb Haaland Reels Her Bureaucracy Back Into The SwampFormer Bureau of Land Management officials from the Trucontinue reading >
- In Exclusive Interview, Trump Calls Sept. 18 Rally A ‘Setup,’ Says GOP Senate Should Fire ‘Disaster’ McConnellTrump called Mitch McConnell a 'disaster,' said George continue reading >
- The 3 Most Important Things To Corporate Media Don’t Matter At All (And That’s The Point)Good government is hard. It’s often boring and unrewacontinue reading >