You can watch much of it live. I’m on the 1:00 civil rights panel, discussing the Abercrombie & Fitch religious-accommodation case. More info here.
Posts Tagged ‘constitutional law’
“What happens if you take the Fifth in a civil case?”
Eugene Volokh has an analysis of an issue that comes up fairly often, and adds an important sidebar as to California law, which departs from the general rule by prohibiting the drawing of an adverse inference against the party that declines to testify.
Cato’s Constitution Day Sept. 17
Sasha Volokh reminds us to mark our calendars:
Cato’s 14th Annual Constitution Day event will be two weeks from now: Thursday, September 17, at Cato’s offices in Washington, D.C. Here’s a link to the site, so you can register. I’ll be on the 2:15-3:30 panel on “Bizarre State Action”, talking about the Amtrak case that I’ve been involved with — see here for links to my previous blogging on the subject. Tim Sandefur and Adam White will be on that panel with me.
Co-bloggers Jonathan Adler and John Elwood will also be on different panels, as will Walter Olson, Bill Eskridge, and others. Steven Calabresi will give the evening lecture on “Liberty and Originalism in Constitutional Law”.
George Will on the Indian Child Welfare Act
“Identity politics can leave a trail of broken bodies and broken hearts… [ICWA treats] children, however attenuated or imaginary their Indian ancestry, as little trophies for tribal power.” George Will (alternate link) on a law I’ve also written about, the Indian Child Welfare Act:
The act empowers tribes to abort adoption proceedings, or even take children from foster homes, solely because the children have even a minuscule quantum of American Indian blood. Although, remember, this act is supposedly not about race….
In final adoption hearings in Arizona, a judge asks, “Does this child contain any Native American blood?” It is revolting that judicial proceedings in the United States can turn on questions about group rights deriving from “blood.”… This is discordant with the inherent individualism of the nation’s foundational natural rights tradition, which is incompatible with the ICWA. It should be overturned or revised before more bodies and hearts are broken.
Save the date, Sept. 17: Cato’s Constitution Day
Mark your calendar for Sept. 17 when Cato will be holding its 14th annual Constitution Day reviewing the past Supreme Court term and looking forward to the next. I’ll be on a 1 p.m. panel on civil rights with William Eskridge (Yale) and Roger Clegg (Center for Equal Opportunity), moderated by Roger Pilon, where I’ll be talking about religious accommodation in the workplace; other sessions will include such well-known figures as Ilya Shapiro, Trevor Burrus, and Michael Cannon of Cato, Jonathan Adler of Case Western, Timothy Sandefur of PLF, and Damon Root of Reason. The annual B. Kenneth Simon Lecture will be given by Prof. Steven Calabresi of Northwestern.
Register at the link to attend in Washington, D.C., or plan to watch online.
“Future generations” lawsuit against fossil fuel use
When a legal action is “first of its kind,” sometimes that’s because it’s a lawyer-driven gimmick. [MSNBC via Constitution Center; ABA Journal]
P.S. As several readers point out, it’s unlikely that lawyers claiming to represent the interests of future generations of Americans will be allowed into court any time soon to challenge the continued expansion of federal government debt.
Republican debate observations
“Cross-examination is the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth,” a great legal scholar once wrote. Fox News proved it — and generated a superior, entertaining debate — by aiming genuinely hard, personalized questions at the Republican front-runners. We know more now about which candidates are heedless of liberty and the U.S. Constitution, ill-prepared or inconsistent. Would that the press were this tough on all candidates.
I live-tweeted it last night and here are a few highlights, in earliest-to-latest chronological order:
Hmm. RT @cmoraff Carly Fiorina wants tech companies to be nicer to Feds who want to snoop around your data. http://t.co/ZLrdmQXvTu #cato2016
— Walter Olson (@walterolson) August 6, 2015
"The Fourth Amendment is what we fought the Revolution for." Rand Paul vs. Chris Christie, a compelling exchange. #cato2016 #gopdebate
— Walter Olson (@walterolson) August 7, 2015
.@RandPaul: We fought the American Revolution for the Fourth Amendment. Get a warrant. #Cato2016
— David Boaz (@David_Boaz) August 7, 2015
Trump made a good point about expensive, anticompetitive system of penning health insurance within state lines #cato2016 #gopdebate
— Walter Olson (@walterolson) August 7, 2015
"We need to repeal Dodd-Frank." @marcorubio, grabbing an effective @carlyfiorina theme, cites effect on small banks #cato2016 #gopdebate
— Walter Olson (@walterolson) August 7, 2015
Sorry, but @RandPaul gave a misleading account of the Houston pastors' subpoena. My 2 cents: http://t.co/iNR1u06Q3w #Cato2016 #GOPDebate
— Walter Olson (@walterolson) August 7, 2015
Contra @marcorubio & Huckabee, Antonin Scalia in 2008: "of course" Const does not ban abortion http://t.co/s4h8Yznr9C #cato2016 #GOPDebate
— Walter Olson (@walterolson) August 7, 2015
More 140-character commentary on the debates, including the one earlier this week, at this link. And more from Cato colleagues.
Ida Wells, free speech, and the rule of law
I write at Cato about the accomplishments of Ida Wells (1862-1931), who after being born into slavery in Mississippi became the leading voice documenting the horrors of lynch law in late nineteenth century America, as well as a free speech heroine (a mob in Memphis attacked and destroyed her printing press). Wells is also the subject of today’s Google Doodle. And as I learned from Nicholas Johnson’s post last year at Volokh, she was a notable figure in the history of the Second Amendment as well.
Goldwater Institute files constitutional challenge to ICWA
Live now: The Goldwater Institute has filed a multi-sided challenge to the operation of the Indian Child Welfare Act. AD v. Washburn; website at EqualProtection.org; investigative report Death on a Reservation; Goldwater policy paper. More updates will follow.
Our earlier coverage here, in my writing at Reason and Cato, etc.
Related: in Minnesota, a Twin Cities couple represented by attorney Mark Fiddler has filed suit saying that ICWA violates their constitutional rights by requiring that they notify the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe before proceeding with plans to allow a non-Indian couple to adopt their infant. [Minneapolis Star-Tribune] Also: Johnston Moore, Children Deserve Families.
Supreme Court and constitutional law roundup
- Supreme Court grants certiorari (as Cato had urged) in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, on First Amendment rights of individual public employees against unions, potentially major sequel to Harris v. Quinn (our coverage) and Knox v. SEIU (our coverage). More: Jason Bedrick, Cato;
- More First Amendment: On same day, high court says Texas can turn down Confederate-flag license plates but that town of Gilbert, Ariz. impermissibly took content into account in regulating roadside signs [Lyle Denniston; Eugene Volokh on Gilbert and earlier, and on license plates] Ilya Shapiro has a wrap-up of other end-of-term cases;
- Paging judicial-independence buffs: study finds Obama stands out for aggressive comments on pending SCOTUS cases [W$J via Jonathan Adler]
- Abercrombie v. EEOC followup (earlier): If Thomas’s dissent has the courage of its convictions, maybe it’s because he was longest-serving chairman in EEOC history [Tamara Tabo] “SCOTUS requires employers to stereotype in ruling for EEOC in hijab-accommodation case” [Jon Hyman] Yes, employers can still have dress codes, but read on for the caveat [Daniel Schwartz]
- “Illinois Uses Racial Preferences for No Good Reason,” Seventh Circuit take note [Ilya Shapiro and Julio Colomba, Cato]
- Feds can refuse to register a “disparaging” trademark. Consistent with the First Amendment? [Shapiro, Cato]
- More from Ilya Somin on anniversary of eminent domain Kelo v. New London decision [one, two, more]