THE CASE OF THE DISAPPEARANCE OF 5-4 SCOTUS RULINGS

The Times analyze the recent puzzling disappearance of 5-4 rulings by the Supreme Court, led currently by Chief Justice John Roberts, in this term as opposed to the previous term where the judges split 5-4 on 13 cases out of the 41 cases they decided. In addition to the election year effect (a correlation that suggests that during election years the Court tries to achieve more consensus on cases in order to avoid controversy), the Times contends that criticism from the public as well as some from certain respected conservative voices on decisions from the last term might be influencing factors this year, particularly on the chief justice.  The combined result is the appearance that the conservative judges shepherded by Roberts are hewing narrowly and "closely to the facts of each case" and avoiding broader activist decisions to appease their liberal colleagues and thus avoid the divisive 5-4 results.

Read more here.

SUPREME COURT FOLLY

I've been reading the Supreme Court's decision rejecting Seattle's and Louisville's modest attempt to promote racial diversity and integration within their school district as unconstitutional. Many pundits have noted this, but I can't go without mentioning how horrifyingly ironic (a "cruel irony" as Justice Stevens charges in his dissent) it is that the majority decision cites in part to justify itself the groundbreaking Brown v. Board of Education decision overturning segregation in schools. This should be disheartening to all Americans, but I know that really it's sad for mainly "Liberals."

However, Conservatives should also disagree with this Court's decision--issues of race aside--because federalism (balancing of federal powers with that of state and local prerogative) has been trumped by the Conservatives' horror of horrors, judicial activism.

These are my summary thoughts for the moment.