To commemorate the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade (22 January 2013), this month I have published a two-part series over at The Catholic Thing. You can find each part at the following links: Roe at Forty, part 1: The Court’s Failure to Address the Question of the Unborn’s Moral Status Roe at Forty, part 2: The Court’s Two Unwarranted Stipulations Even though many citizens reject Roe v. Wade, not many know why it is so flawed. The above pieces present very brief summaries of … [Read more...]
My Two Part Series on Roe v. Wade, and an extensive critique of Roe
January 18, 2013 By Leave a Comment
Roe at Forty, part 2: The Court’s Two Unwarranted Stipulations
January 18, 2013 By Leave a Comment
Two weeks ago, I published over at The Catholic Thing part 1 of my two part series to commemorate the 40th anniversary of Roe. v. Wade (22 January 2013): "Roe at Forty, part 1: The Court’s Failure to Address the Question of the Unborn’s Moral Status." Part 2 was published today. Entitled, "Roe at Forty, part 2: The Court’s Two Unwarranted Stipulations," here's how it begins: Not only did Roe v. Wade’s majority opinion fail to address the question of whether the unborn human being is a … [Read more...]
If Not “Under God,” then What?
September 14, 2012 By Leave a Comment
That's the title of my latest entry over at The Catholic Thing. Here's how it begins: The recent scuffle over God’s temporary absence from the Democrat Party’s 2012 platform is a reminder of how the understanding of “God” in certain enclaves of American life has become diminished. His critics have ceased to comprehend the meaning of His absence – or even to understand the role His presence has played in our understanding of our natural rights. It was in 1954 that the U. S. Congress … [Read more...]
Even the President of the United States Sometimes Must Have to Stand Naked
April 4, 2012 By Leave a Comment
From Adam White over at The Weekly Standard: Last week, President Obama clumsily announced that it would be "unprecedented" for the Supreme Court to strike down "a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress." This week, his words are already having an effect in the courts—but not the effect he hoped for. Yesterday, in another case challenging Obamacare, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ordered Justice Department lawyers for a briefing on … [Read more...]
Why Did Legal Elites Underestimate the Case Against the Mandate?
March 31, 2012 By Leave a Comment
That's the title of Jonathan Adler's insightful post over at the Volokh Conspiracy. It begins this way: Greg Sargent is one of many commentators wondering “How did legal observers and Obamacare backers get it so wrong?” I think he’s asking the wrong question. A better question to ask is: why did so many expect legal elites to have any particular insight into the current court? After all, many of the legal experts who were so dismissive of the arguments against the mandate were … [Read more...]
We Are All Imbeciles Now: The HHS Regulations and the Specter of Buck v. Bell
March 1, 2012 By Leave a Comment
That's the title of a piece I published earlier this week over at Bench Memos on National Review Online. Here's how it begins: In the 1927 case Buck v. Bell, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Virginia statute that allowed the “superintendent of certain institutions” to order the sterilizations of “feeble-minded” persons who were under the care of these state institutions, if the superintendent“shall be of opinion that it is for the best interests of the patients and of society that an … [Read more...]
The Dangers of Anti-Sharia Laws
February 15, 2012 By Leave a Comment
That's the title of a well-reasoned article published in the March 2012 issue of First Things. Authored by the University of St. Thomas Law School professor Robert K. Vischer, here's how it begins: The law in several states now requires pro-life pharmacists to dispense the morning-after pill, Christian adoption agencies to place children with same-sex couples, and religious entities to pay for their employees’ contraceptives. The list of such violations of religious freedom keeps growing, … [Read more...]
Is There a Right to Clone?
November 14, 2011 By Leave a Comment
I don't think so. In a 2002 article in the Nevada Law Journal, "Cloning and Reproductive Liberty," I make the argument that one cannot get a right to clone from the Supreme Court's reproductive rights jurisprudence. You can read the article here. … [Read more...]
Follow Patheos
Catholic: