Some commentators argue that Brett Kavanaugh will shift the Supreme Court to the right, based on metrics that show him more conservative than retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy. But a close look at how Kennedy voted in more than a dozen cases reveals he was far from a “moderate” on criminal procedure—which suggests Kavanaugh might actually move the court towards the center on those issues, writes a former federal prosecutor.
A former Supreme Court Justice once said, allegedly quoting Thurgood Marshall, that the Constitution doesn’t prohibit legislatures from enacting “stupid laws.” The only check on judicial ignorance or duplicity is engaged voters, says a commentator on drug issues.
The 5-4 decision announced Friday is a victory for privacy in the digital age. The case marks a major change in how police can obtain phone records. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, joined by the court’s four liberals.
By a 6-to-3 vote, the high court Monday voided the 1992 Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA). The law barred state-authorized sports gambling with some exceptions. Thirty-two states may move to offer sports betting.
A professor at the University of California Davis School of Law predicts Supreme Court justices will defend the First Amendment principles of free speech against government attempts to curb Internet abuses—even when those abuses involve promoting falsehoods online.
Justice Anthony Kennedy was irked that his colleague Sonia Sotomayor had violated protocol by doing research on the Internet. But it’s been done before, so the rule seems to be that justices don’t like other justices doing such research.
Most likely, neither the justices who believe that the Constitution allows strict gun laws nor those who think that such gun control laws are unconstitutional are sure they have the votes to prevail if the court takes up these issues.
A Supreme Court ruling in June overruled the conviction of a sex offender for violating his probation after posting on Facebook. But that opens up a new legal minefield over limitations on internet access for anyone convicted of a crime, warns a Washington, DC attorney.
A case pending at the Supreme Court could decide whether constitutional protections against warrantless searches prevent courts and law enforcement from using evidence discovered from cellphone records. A former NYC prosecutor contends that the justices should hear arguments.