The groping for credible explanations of Roberts? decision, and the resort to easy, flimsy ones, is understandable. It can be maddeningly difficult, even impossible, to know what drives a judicial decision. Supreme Court justices speak to us primarily through their published opinions, but the reasoning in those opinions is often unclear or inconsistent. What Roberts delivered last week was especially so. The chief justice wrote, in a real sense, two clashing opinions: one expanding (or at least tolerating) federal power when it takes the form of a tax, the other likely to restrict federal power under a novel and, in the view of most constitutional scholars, artificial reading of the Commerce Clause.
Source: http://feeds.slate.com/click.phdo?i=037e62e946512ab521298e73dc249714
williams syndrome hoya casa de mi padre corned beef and cabbage diners drive ins and dives jeff who lives at home 49ers news
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.