Over the past few decades, the US Supreme Court has embraced methods of statutory interpretation that conveniently justify its radical rightward shift. As much as the progressive twentieth-century jurist Felix Frankfurter might lament this development, he bears much responsibility for it.
LONDON – The right-wing majority on the US Supreme Court holds the US Constitution in a vice-like grip. It took barely a moment to overturn Roe v. Wade, and with it, a half-century of jurisprudence. It is now engaged in a sustained assault on the “administrative state” (federal regulatory and enforcement agencies) and, if Justice Clarence Thomas gets his way, perhaps on contraception and same-sex consensual relations, too.
LONDON – The right-wing majority on the US Supreme Court holds the US Constitution in a vice-like grip. It took barely a moment to overturn Roe v. Wade, and with it, a half-century of jurisprudence. It is now engaged in a sustained assault on the “administrative state” (federal regulatory and enforcement agencies) and, if Justice Clarence Thomas gets his way, perhaps on contraception and same-sex consensual relations, too.