Michael Dorf (via Legal Insurrection) points out that the Pennsylvania Senator's party switch might actually assist Republicans in mounting opposition to judicial nominations because of a peculiar Judiciary Committee rule: "breaking (the equivalent of) a filibuster in the Senate Judiciary Committee requires the consent of at least one member of the minority. Before today, Specter was likely to be that one Republican. Now what?"
Specter's switch and Souter's replacement
- Obamacare Debate Complete: The participant with the most compelling argument was...
- Sackett v. EPA
- Coming next week: featured discussion on PPACA
- A small victory against the EPA
- New Podcasts: Making sense of the court order in Kiobel
- Kiobel debate complete
- New Featured Discussion: Kiobel and corporate liability under the Alien Tort Statute
- Supreme Court hears argument on Stolen Valor Act
- Compucredit v. Greenwood
- Wherein George Soros wastes his money
- The myth of the pro-business Supreme Court (continued)
- The expense of the death penalty
- Alex Tabarrok on medical patents
- Reuters releases innovative SCOTUS tracking tool
- Supreme Court TV?
Center for Legal Policy at the