Archives for

High Court

Lifetime Tenure – Or Longer?

Paul Jacob, Last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee grilled Judge Neil Gorsuch, President Trump’s nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court. Talk about a silly rite. Senators repeatedly fired questions about specific legal views that no High Court nominee ever answers. Why not? Because for a prospective justice to answer would be to pre-judge possible future

Trump Executive Order Forces Choice: Mob Rule or Constitution?

Robert Charles, Mob rule and street violence are un-American.  Somehow, the left does not see it that way.  Berkley burns, hooded figures beat innocents, buildings are vandalized, and a speaker is run out of town.  Senate Democrats watch mounting political violence – and do nothing.  Worse, they demean a President with whom they disagree, boycott

Last chance for Obama to sneak in Garland to the Supreme Court is unlikely

A last-ditch effort for President Obama to try and punch Merrick Garland through to the Supreme Court to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia is unlikely. A new Congress starts at noon Tuesday and there’s no active chatter that the Obama administration has anything in the works or is even contemplating a bizarre, extra-Constitutional power

The UK High Court’s Invalidation of Brexit Is a Constitutional Crisis in the Making

Young Voices Advocates, Editor’s note: This column was authored by Alex Grass. The UK High Court has struck down Brexit. Such a repudiation of the national will, and of legislation already approved by parliament, has the potential to permanently warp Great Britain’s rule of law. Indeed, it may already have. This controversy, at the core,

Hillary Clinton and the High Court

Bill Murchison, The worst thing about Supreme Court-anxiety in the upcoming election is that Supreme Court-anxiety should figure in the upcoming election at all; that it should figure hugely, heatedly — arsenic inserted into a political casserole noxious enough on its own terms. Our national government’s judicial branch matters in a way it shouldn’t. The

The Second Amendment and Hillary Clinton’s basket of inconsistencies

Curt Levey, In response to the first question in Wednesday’s third and final presidential debate, Donald Trump declared that “if my opponent should win this race, … we will have a Second Amendment which will be a very, very small replica of what it is right now.” That might sound like an overly pessimistic prediction,

The Candidates’ High Court Priority — and the Constitution’s

Jeff Jacoby,  RIGHT OFF THE bat, moderator Chris Wallace asked Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump: “What’s your view on how the Constitution should be interpreted?” Right off the bat, Clinton and Trump gave the wrong answers. Clinton announced that the Supreme Court needs to “stand on the side of the American people,” and then rattled