Thursday, June 28, 2012

Terrible arguments prevail (but it’s not so bad)

Andrew Koppelman

This morning, I was prepared to write about a humanitarian catastrophe – 30 million people deprived of their health insurance, chaos as the Supreme Court smashed a statutory scheme that had already become tightly integrated with a fifth of the American economy, all on the basis of terrible legal arguments.  Terrible arguments did carry the day, but the damage is relatively minimal.  So I’m just left to fret, in typical law professor fashion, about a poorly reasoned Supreme Court decision that is going to confuse courts in future cases.  Chief Justice John Roberts wrote a lousy opinion, but on the big issues, he didn’t do much damage.  (How much will depend on how badly Republican governors are willing to hurt the working poor in their own states in order to signal their disdain for Obama.)

You can find the rest of this post at, here.

Older Posts
Newer Posts