It sounds great from an institutional standpoint. Maybe the Court could do a better job of persuasion. But it won't come overnight. If Roberts leads by example and writes clearly and talks to his colleagues, it may happen.
We have this idealistic notion in this country that we can live in kind of splendid anonymity, we can walk around and be left alone. And this question really raises, in the post-9/11 era, the issue of whether that's really true anymore.
But there is the very deeply held belief in the court that they do nothing that gives the appearance of impropriety. And I think in this case, Cheney may have gone over the line by inviting him [Scalia] down to hunt. Scalia, in a reflective moment, may be thinking, 'I shouldn't have done that.'
The Rehnquist revolution has reached a certain equilibrium. They don't seem to be going in any radical directions. Even among the two liberal justices, [Stephen] Breyer and [Ruth Bader] Ginsburg, they are cautious pragmatists.
The better argument for the result reached in Roe v. Wade is that it's necessary for the equality of women, rather than grounding it in the privacy right, ... Closed Chambers: The Rise, Fall, and Future of the Modern Supreme Court.
This law does seem to be crafted to demand some kind of Supreme Court review. Because it really goes to this question of how much you have to protect the life versus the health of the mother. ... And it actually could be one of those cases that could turn on John Roberts' vote.
The issue of physician-assisted suicide is tied into what President Bush calls 'the culture of life.' So this is a real emotional issue for them [conservatives]. And it's likely to be a very close ruling at the court, with Roberts again, perhaps, a key vote.
She doesn't give much guidance to other courts in her rulings, there's a lack of consistency, distinctiveness, ... Often it seems her opinions are too narrow, reflecting only how it strikes just Justice O'Connor, what she personally thinks.
She doesn't give much guidance to other courts in her rulings, there's a lack of consistency, distinctiveness. Often it seems her opinions are too narrow, reflecting only how it strikes just Justice O'Connor, what she personally thinks.