The Israeli Fight Over Judicial Review Highlights the Dangers of Unconstrained Democracy
Opponents of the proposed reforms are right that unlimited majority rule is a recipe for tyranny.
Opponents of the proposed reforms are right that unlimited majority rule is a recipe for tyranny.
Plus: A listener asks the editors if the nation is indeed unraveling or if she is just one of "The Olds" now.
The case hinges on the claim that the former president tried to cover up a campaign finance violation with which he was never charged.
Opponents of the reforms favored by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's coalition should acknowledge the threat posed by unconstrained majority rule.
The president wants to redefine federally licensed gun dealers in service of an ineffective anti-crime strategy.
The president and his predecessor both tried to impose gun control by executive fiat.
Although the law did not change, regulators suddenly decided to criminalize unregistered possession of braced pistols.
These days, he may run for president. His politics have changed.
A proposal to limit state AG (and other) forum-shopping for national injunctions.
The decision defends the separation of powers and the rule of law against an attempt to prohibit firearm accessories by administrative fiat.
Jonathan Mitchell failed in his effort to become a legal academic, so he put his theories into practice instead.
According to the former president's lawyers, his decision to retain the documents made them "personal."
The most jarring thing about Senate candidate J.D. Vance is how open he is about rejecting the rule of law.
The federal appellate judge suggests judges should focus less on social media attention, and more on ensuring their opinions are clear, succinct and correct.
The lack of statutory authority is the main issue raised by legal challenges to the plan.
The free market allows people to cooperate, fix errors, and adapt to changing circumstances.
It is hard to see how, given the contortions required to deliver the unilateral prohibition that Donald Trump demanded.
Regulators imposed the ban based on a highly implausible and counterintuitive reading of federal law.
In his Dobbs concurrence, the senior associate justice reiterates his outlying views on precedent and his belief that all substantive due process decisions were "demonstrably erroneous."
The justices hear fewer cases and decide fewer questions than they used to.
"When those charges are brought, these people are guilty," Lightfoot said.
We will get opinions on Monday, but the Court will have to average more than two opinions per day to finish before July 4.
With thirty-three opinions in argued cases yet to issue, the Supreme Court is well behind the usual pace.
Language in the American Rescue Plan Act prohibits states from using the funds "directly or indirectly" to offset lost revenues from tax cuts.
A revealing interview on the Supreme Court, Chief Justice Roberts, climate change, and Tribe's tweeting habits.
A belated 2021 lecture sponsored by the Georgetown Center for the Constitution
The president’s COVID-19 adviser embodies the arrogance of technocrats who are sure they know what’s best for us.
The Biden administration's main priority seems to be leaving the agency's authority vague enough to allow future interventions.
That's a fundamentally anti-democratic attitude.
Clarifying the agency's authority could impede future power grabs.
The decision against the rule hinged on whether the agency had the power it asserted.
Starr County District Attorney Gocha Allen Ramirez has yet to explain how this egregious error escaped his notice.
As Starr County District Attorney Gocha Allen Ramirez belatedly conceded, that charge is explicitly prohibited by the Texas Penal Code.
The question for the Supreme Court was not whether the policy was wise but whether it was legal.
S.B. 8 relies on litigation tricks that conservatives have long condemned as a threat to the rule of law.
Thwarted politicians rant, pout, and are outraged by anybody who pushes back.
The president seems determined to anoint the agency’s director as the nation’s COVID-19 dictator, no matter what the law says.
The Court said it "strains credulity" to believe that Congress gave the CDC the "breathtaking amount of authority" it asserted.
Taking the "public" out of public service
The administration issued the order even while conceding that it lacked the authority to do so.
It could, if it actually had the vast public health powers that the Biden administration claims it does.
Brett Kavanaugh, who provided a crucial fifth vote, said he agrees that the CDC does not have the authority to override rental contracts.
The agency’s legal defense of its eviction moratorium implies that it has vast powers to order Americans around.
Legal scholar Dan Farber explains how the vast executive discretion created by current immigration law is incompatible with rule-of-law principles.
A new book documents that newcomers revitalize beliefs in hard work, property rights, and the rule of law.
These proposals augment those made in Paul Rosenzweig and Vishnu Kannan's important recent article on the subject.
A list of reforms to help restore the rule of law in a post-Trump Washington.
The right's response to the coronavirus lockdowns brings out a longstanding American paradox.
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10