Does that mean George W. Bush is really just SCOTUSPOTUS?
H/T to my amazing wife and colleague, Chapin Cimino.
« Generating Scholarship From Service and Teaching | Main | Goffman Dissertation -- Part Two »
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
The comments to this entry are closed.
The usual dishonesty from Scalia, although his dissent on a decision upholding the Fourth Amendment[1] does win the week's Scalian Award.
[1] He labeled is as reeking of 1984. A decision *limiting* police powers.
Posted by: Barry | June 25, 2015 at 11:53 AM
Good analogy.
It is all just politics to get (or complain about) the result.
The facts, law and reasoning to get to (or avoid) the desired result are all sort of irrelevant in such cases.
Posted by: anon | June 25, 2015 at 12:14 PM
It would be interesting to see what sort of case Roberts thinks falls on the other side of the Palmer v. Massachusetts line.
Posted by: Derek Tokaz | June 25, 2015 at 02:01 PM
summon: philosoraptor
Posted by: The Most Interesting Breh in the World | June 25, 2015 at 07:00 PM