1. What if Congress passed a law, that limits #SCOTUS' power of judicial review to the last two parts of the Caroline Products footnote No. 4? Those two of three paragraphs IMO are the work of one of my favorite justices and fellow @UMassAmherst troublemaker Harland Fiske Stone.
2. "It is unnecessary to consider now whether legislation which restricts those political processes which can ordinarily be expected to bring about repeal of undesirable legislation, is to be subjected to more exacting judicial scrutiny under the
3. general prohibitions of the Fourteenth Amendment than are most other types of legislation...
Nor need we inquire whether similar considerations enter into the review of statutes directed at particular religious... or nations... or racial minorities...: whether prejudice
Nor need we inquire whether similar considerations enter into the review of statutes directed at particular religious... or nations... or racial minorities...: whether prejudice
4. against discrete and insular minorities may be a special condition, which tends seriously to curtail the operation of those political processes ordinarily to be relied upon to protect minorities, and which may call for a correspondingly more searching judicial inquiry....."
5. As we sit and wonder what the new Tawney court will do with the ACA, the fact that they are likely to not apply rational basis standard to this act is IMO grounds to limit their power of judicial review by statute. Because John Marshall essentially made up the power in
6. Marbury v. Madison, we should see the heads of the so-called "originalists" spinning around like Linda Blair in the Exorcist when they try to strike the limitations down based solely on the musings of a power-hungry Federalist jurist.
@tribelaw @AlanDersh @neal_katyal
@tribelaw @AlanDersh @neal_katyal
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
