Today in the News, 3.9.09
- “‘We think Justice Thomas got it exactly right.’” CAC President Doug Kendall is quoted in Sunday’s LA Times, discussing Clarence Thomas’ concurring opinion in last week’s Supreme Court decision in Wyeth v. Levine.
- “‘What we’re trying to do is maintain as much voter input as possible, but . . . minimize the requirement that (judges) have to go out and raise money to stay in office,’ Duncan said.” The El Paso Times reports that a Texas state senator has introduced legislation to reform judicial elections in Texas, following recent comments by Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson of the Texas Supreme Court, encouraging the state legislature to move away from judicial elections. (Also stemming from Caperton v. Massey, the Detroit News reports that the Michigan Supreme Court has begun creating formal rules for when justices must recuse themselves.)
- “The Republicans’ rush to threaten filibusters in the absence of actual nominees is not only at odds with their previous views on the subject, but shows a lack of respect for the confirmation process.” Finally, the NY Times editorial board weighs in on the recent letter sent by Senate Republicans to President Obama, threatening to filibuster his judicial nominations.
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...