Today in the News, 3.20.09
- “[I]sn’t it also the case that when you reverse, rewrite, or undermine every rule and standard you’ve ever laid out for measuring the fitness of a presidential nominee, you become ridiculous—period?” Dahlia Lithwick has a pointed piece in Slate criticizing Republican Senators for their hypocrisy in their treatment of President Obama’s nominees.
- “The Kagan nomination is not controversial. Every solicitor general who served from 1985 has endorsed her nomination.” Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, describing the nomination of Harvard Law School Dean Elena Kagan, just before the Senate confirmed her as the nation’s first female Solicitor General.
- “I’m not optimistic. I’ll put it that way.” Justice Antonin Scalia responds to a question of whether his championing of originalism is a “lost cause,” in the conclusion of a five-part interview series posted by National Review Online this week. It is perhaps not coincidental that Justice Scalia is starting to lose hope just as progressives are starting to look carefully at Constitutional text and history, as documented in “Rethinking Original Intent” from this past weekend’s Wall Street Journal. Maybe Justice Scalia has been reading the same history we have.
More from
December 11, 2025
Not Above the Law Coalition Demands Accountability: Trump’s Illegal National Guard Deployments Threaten Democracy
WASHINGTON - As the Senate Armed Services Committee holds a hearing on the Trump administration’s deployment...
December 14, 2025
The Framers Warned Us About the Dangers of Corruption
December 11, 2025We Seem to Have the Supreme Court’s Originalism Fail of the Term
On Monday, the Supreme Court heard argument in a case that could upend how the...
December 9, 2025
CAC Release: Major Campaign Finance Case Tests Court’s Willingness to Respect Congress’s Policy Judgments Aimed at Curbing Harmful Corruption
WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in National Republican...
December 8, 2025
CAC Release: Conservative Justices Neglect History at Oral Argument in Monumental Case about Independent Agencies
WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Trump v....
U.S. Supreme Court
Pung v. Isabella County
In Pung v. Isabella County, the Supreme Court is considering whether the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment is implicated when a local government seizes real property to satisfy a tax debt and then...