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
Site Feed
Also please visit my opera blog, Box Five!
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
| [::..archive..::] |
|---|
| :: |
:: Thursday, August 17, 2006 ::
Many thanks to readers who keep popping back here for new stuff. Summer time is, of course, crunch time for law-review writing, so blogging as been thin. So, what's been up?
* The ABA says presidential signing statements are unconstitutional. That is -- umm, is it OK to talk about the ABA? I -- umm, well, I don't agree, any more than any President or OLC of either party ever has. It boils down to, does enforcing the law (the core Executive Branch mandate) ever involve interpreting it? Of course it does. A signing statement is just a heads-up on the probable (not definite) direction of executive interpretation of the law in question.
As for Congress conferring standing on itself by statute to challenge signing statements: first, Congress can't do that if standing is a constitutional requirement ("case or controversy") rather than just a judicial docket-management device. Besides, what relief would Congress ask for -- an injunction to the President to enforce the law differently than he said he would in his signing statement? Congress retains its law-making powers, you know. Reconceptualizing itself as a plaintiff and invoking the equity jurisdiction of the federal courts strikes me as a bizarre alternative to simply passing a new law.
* A U.S. District Judge has just ruled the Administration's NSA "eavesdropping" plan unconstitutional. I'll probably disagree with the holding when I read it, but I'll say this -- it's nice to have a country with courts in which the government can lose.
:: David M. Wagner 12:47 PM [+] ::
...
:: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 ::
The resource on presidential signing statements
:: David M. Wagner 6:50 PM [+] ::
...
* The ABA says presidential signing statements are unconstitutional. That is -- umm, is it OK to talk about the ABA? I -- umm, well, I don't agree, any more than any President or OLC of either party ever has. It boils down to, does enforcing the law (the core Executive Branch mandate) ever involve interpreting it? Of course it does. A signing statement is just a heads-up on the probable (not definite) direction of executive interpretation of the law in question.
As for Congress conferring standing on itself by statute to challenge signing statements: first, Congress can't do that if standing is a constitutional requirement ("case or controversy") rather than just a judicial docket-management device. Besides, what relief would Congress ask for -- an injunction to the President to enforce the law differently than he said he would in his signing statement? Congress retains its law-making powers, you know. Reconceptualizing itself as a plaintiff and invoking the equity jurisdiction of the federal courts strikes me as a bizarre alternative to simply passing a new law.
* A U.S. District Judge has just ruled the Administration's NSA "eavesdropping" plan unconstitutional. I'll probably disagree with the holding when I read it, but I'll say this -- it's nice to have a country with courts in which the government can lose.
:: David M. Wagner 12:47 PM [+] ::
...
:: David M. Wagner 6:50 PM [+] ::
...
