Join the Network!  
ProgressNow Colorado
Post from Alan Franklin:
As it turns out, SCOTUS Justices are important
Bad? Brilliant?
You can rate this post.
Register or login now and
tell us what you think.
So you wanted to "play nice" with the White House on those Supreme Court nominees a couple years ago, did you? Formed that "Gang of 14" to keep our collective wheels spinning in greased grooves, no nasty contentious filibusters--right?

The result:

Precedents Begin to Fall for Roberts Court

No Supreme Court nominee could be confirmed these days without paying homage to the judicial doctrine of "stare decisis," Latin for "to stand by things decided." Yet experienced listeners have learned to take these professions of devotion to precedent "cum grano salis," Latin for "with a grain of salt."

Both Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. assured their Senate questioners at their confirmation hearings that they, too, respected precedent. So why were they on the majority side of a 5-to-4 decision last week declaring that a 45-year-old doctrine excusing people whose "unique circumstances" prevented them from meeting court filing deadlines was now "illegitimate"?

It was the second time the Roberts court had overturned a precedent, and the first in a decision with a divided vote. It surely will not be the last...

Sometimes the court overrules cases without actually saying so. Some argue that this is what happened in April, when a 5-to-4 majority upheld the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act without making much effort to reconcile that ruling with a decision in 2000 that found a nearly identical Nebraska law unconstitutional.

As a technical matter, the new decision, Gonzales v. Carhart, left the earlier ruling still on the books, doing its overruling "by stealth, without having the grace to admit that is what they were doing," in the words of Ronald Dworkin, the legal philosopher, who wrote a highly critical appraisal of the new decision in The New York Review of Books last month. "Justices Roberts and Alito had both declared their intention to respect precedent in their confirmation hearings, and no doubt they were reluctant to admit so soon how little those declarations were worth," Professor Dworkin said from London in an e-mail message.

Reader Comments

Comments are closed for this post.

  
So I wasn't wrong about Sen. Salazar selling us out on Roberts, et al.
By John H Kennedy Jun 26th 2007 at 12:03 pm EDT
no nasty contentious filibusters--right?

The Left will be paying for this sell out for the next 50-75 years... Thank You Senator Salazar!
  
Highest Rated All Network Posts

Lessons from a Quagmire

Posted Nov 21, 2009 12:25am
Comments (0)

Saturday Mailbag: Friday Edition

Posted Nov 20, 2009 6:08pm
Comments (0)

A battlefield in the courtroom

Posted Nov 20, 2009 4:23pm
Comments (1)

Signs of hate, right here in Denver

Posted Nov 20, 2009 1:03pm
Comments (1)

HHS Task Force Mammogram Recs Slammed

Posted Nov 19, 2009 8:52am
Comments (0)

Toddler teacher convicted for DUI on 0.00 breathalyzer and negative drug test - Adams County Justice

Posted Nov 15, 2009 2:52pm
Comments (0)

Got Defense?

Posted Nov 15, 2009 9:41am
Comments (0)

Dave Schultheis is the Worst Person in the World

Posted Nov 12, 2009 5:29pm
Comments (1)

What McInnis might say

Posted Nov 12, 2009 7:23am
Comments (0)

Veteran's Day 2009

Posted Nov 11, 2009 8:38pm
Comments (0)

* NOTE: ProgressNow Colorado is not responsible for the content of member postings.



Search Blog

Make a Donation
Find People
Find Groups
Find Events
Write Officials
Join our group on FacebookFollow us on TwitterProgressive JobwireProgressNow State Partner Colorado Blogs

National Blogs

1536 Wynkoop St., #4A, Denver, CO 80202 | ph: (303) 991-1900 | fax: (303) 991-1902 | progress@progressnowcolorado.org

© 2005-2009 ProgressNow Colorado, All rights reserved. Privacy Policy. Fair Use Statement. Terms of Service.