:: welcome to

NINOMANIA

:: A constitutional law blog by Scalia/Thomas fan David M. Wagner, M.A., J.D., Research Fellow, National Legal Foundation, and Teacher, Veritas Preparatory Academy. Opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect those of the NLF or Veritas. :: bloghome | E-mail me ::


"Scalialicious!"
-- Eve Tushnet


"Frankfurter was born too soon for the Web, but I'm sure that, had it been possible, there would have been the equivalent of Ninomania for Frankfurter."
-- Mark Tushnet
(I agree, and commented here.)


"The preeminent Scalia blog"
-- Underneath Their Robes


 Subscribe in a reader



Site Feed


Also please visit my opera blog, Box Five!

    follow me on Twitter



    Bloglinks:

    Above the Law, by David Lat

    Balkinization

    CrimLaw

    Duncan's Con Law Course Blog

    Eve Tushnet

    Eye of Polyphemus, by Jamie Jeffords

    How Appealing

    Hugh Hewitt

    Justice Thomas Appreciation Page

    Legal Theory Blog

    Lex Communis

    Opinio Juris

    Overlawyered.com

    Paper Chase (from JURIST)

    Point of Law (Manhattan Inst.)

    Professor Bainbridge

    Public Discourse

    Redeeming Law, by Prof. Mike Schutt

    SCOTUS Blog

    Volokh Conspiracy

    WSJ Law Blog





    Other fine sites:

    Alexander Hamilton Inst. for Study of Western Civilization

    Ave Maria School of Law

    Center for Thomas More Studies

    Family Defense Center

    The Federalist Society

    The Founders' Constitution

    George Mason University School of Law

    Immigration and Refugee Appellate Center

    Judged: Law Firm News & Intelligence

    JURIST

    Law Prose (Bryan Garner)

    Liberty Library of Constitutional Classics

    National Lawyers Association (alternative to ABA)

    Supreme Court decisions

    The Weekly Standard



    Something I wrote about marriage


    lawyer blogs


    [::..archive..::]
    ::

    :: Thursday, June 29, 2006 ::
    While we wait for the Hamdan decision(s), I'll venture some (probably uncontroversial) predictions.

    1. The controlling opinion will be written by Stevens, for the reasons given at SCOTUSblog here.

    2. It will be badly splintered.

    3. It will uphold military tribunals as a general matter, but will subject them to Due Process standards that will be determinable only by future SCOTUS decisionmaking.

    4. Those standards will be linked in some way to Geneva Common Article 3 (see SCOTUSblog's prediction here), which arguably is less incongruous than basing them on Mathews v. Eldridge, as the Court did in Hamdi, but will nonetheless be vague, and will leave doors open to the further direct application of international law by the Court, without implementing legislation from Congress.

    5. Scalia will file a yummy dissent on that point.

    :: David M. Wagner 9:33 AM [+] ::
    ...

    Site Meter
    This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?