Politico Symposium on Kavanaugh's Confirmation
I have a contribution in it, along with a variety of prominent legal scholars and commentators.
I have a contribution in it, along with a variety of prominent legal scholars and commentators.
"Ginsburg Forgets 14th Amendment, Audience Has To Give Her Constitution," says a Daily Wire headline -- but the story doesn't mention this was section 2,
I don't sign such letters unless I fully agree with every assertion made.
Butter grades, toxic coal ash, and Stairway to Heaven.
... and the conservative Federalist Society is named after legislative history.
Further thoughts on why Kavanaugh's testimony is disqualifying.
Kavanaugh was correct: it was a circus. But he was the one who made it a circus - and for that (apart from anything that he may or may not have done in 1982) he should not be confirmed.
Contrary to the fears of some pundits, the U.S. is not on the brink of civil war. But the explanation for that is far from entirely reassuring.
How "judicial philosophy" figures into the decision to support or oppose a nominee.
One of the points at issue in the debate over the sexual assault accusations against Brett Kavanaugh is whether the standards of proof used by the Senate should be those appropriate to a criminal trial or those of a job interview. The latter is the superior approach.
What Maryland calls "misdemeanors" is very different from what other states do.
The symposium includes contributions by various legal commentators, including Bruce Ackerman, Mari Matsuda, Deborah Rhode, and myself.
Interviewing prisoners, Auer deference in criminal cases, and Rand Paul's neighbor.
The ABA president called for a delay in voting on Kavanaugh's nomination, but the ABA refuses to provide any details about this decision
Jeff Sessions credits the dip to his tough-on-crime policies, but criminal justice groups say that's nonsense.
New FBI statistics for 2017 even show a small increase.
He has prior felony convictions, but 20 years still seems harsh.
It's a scare tactic, and an inaccurate one at that.
A 10-year veteran of U.S. Customs and Border Patrol, Ortiz is also a "serial murderer" say Texas authorities.
But if the show must exist, I have some ripped-from-the-headlines ideas for upcoming plots.
My upcoming speaking engagements through November of this year. Most are free and open to the public.
PolitiFact has the details -- but in any event, the purported statistic was suspect on its face.
Feeding the homeless, drawing the Prophet Muhammed, and Kim Kardashian's plea for executive clemency.
After police said Tibbetts' killer is an illegal immigrant, conservatives started using her death to argue for stricter immigration enforcement.
Is hush money to a politician's mistress "for the purpose of influencing an election" or "personal use"?
A question that now hangs like a miasma over D.C. is "Which of my staffers would hang me out to dry in order to avoid going to federal prison?"
At some level, the "void-for-breadth" doctrine already exists, but it needs to be excavated, clarified, and expanded.
The Wisconsin and Mississippi Supreme Courts have recently rejected state-level Chevron deference.
When a criminal law is extremely broad but perfectly clear, in what sense does it violate rule-of-law principles?
A program at UC-Davis looks at the relationship between capitalism and racism.
Ha! Science now has a non-shocking answer that question: Yes, of course, they are.
Repurposing "fair notice" principles to tackle an important aspect of overcriminalization.
An interesting case applying the private search reconstruction doctrine.
Reason is an independent, audience-supported media organization. Your investment helps us reach millions of people every month.
Yes, I’ll invest in Reason’s growth! No thanksEvery dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.
Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interestedSo much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.
I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanksPush back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.
My donation today will help Reason push back! Not todayBack journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.
Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksBack independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksYour support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksYour donation supports the journalism that questions big-government promises and exposes failed ideas.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksDonate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks