Legalities

"He can’t pull for the AFC Colts, after all, if he’s a Bills fan." I've never understood this mentality, though it is relatively common. I think you should always root for your big rivals when they pay someone else. I'm from a heavily Michigan-partisan family, but you can bet we were rooting for Ohio State in the championship game.

"John Roberts disclosed that he is a Bears fan. That’s quite an admission from a guy who grew up in Indiana..." But Roberts was gone from Indiana before the Colts got there. Lots of Indiana is in the Chicago area, broadly construed.

The Chief Justice's support for the Bears might have something to do with the Colts' coming to Indianapolis only in 1984. Thus, growing up in northern Indiana, he rooted for the Bears.

As the great super bowl champion Pittsburg Steelers of the Terry Bradshaw, Franco Harris days would say . . . the conservatives on the Supreme Court need "one for the thumb".

I have known Jan for years, and her football metaphor to the high court could not be more exacting. As sports teams show us, strength and depth always brings quality and alcolades; only time will tell whether the "Roberts Court" will do the same as, gulp, the Colts did this past Sunday.

great blog and great book

my question is based on your research nd knowledge of the court and its new members, what are your predictions for the 4 big cases of this term:

The abortion cases
The school cases
Mass v EPA
WRTL v FEC

My prediction is the conservatives win the abortion, school, and speech cases 5-4 but that Kennedy goes with the liberals on the global warming case

no one knows as much about the new court as you. what are your predictions?

Jan,

Wonderful metaphor and wonderful book. I finished it in one sitting. I did find one tiny error in it though. :-) When you talked about 03-04 filibusters, you said GOP only needed 5 extra votes to overcome them. That's incorrect. In 03-04, GOP had only 51 Senators and thus needed 9 Democratic votes to overcome a filibuster. Only after the 04 election was the margin reduced to 5 votes.

Well, maybe you can stop thinking about the Bear's secondary but I can't.

The "wrong way" defensive back who came up and helped out and inexplicably double-covered the short receiver coming across the middle instead of going back and covering the then wide-open receiver streaking deep on a post pattern (like the coaches who put him out there as well as all the other defensive backs he was out there on the field with thought he was going to do), resulting in a shocking 53 yard touchdown that should never have happened and which radically shifted the course of the game, well, obviously that "wrong way" defensive back is an analogy for . . . .

Joe: that defensive back wouldn't happen to be named David Souter, would he?

I was just reading your answers to questions over on SCOTUSblog and found them very informative.

Social conservatives will be pleased that you again clearly say if Bush gets another pick it will be a woman and the leading contenders are Owen, Brown and Sykes -- with Mahoney as a possibility but one that the White House knows would "disappoint conservatives" and "right now, the mood is to go strong and tap a solid conservative . . . and rally the base." Social conservatives will be especially pleased you did not mention Callahan as a possibility (Callahan is pushed by Republicans who are social liberals and are on record as being in favor of abortion, like John Fund).

I also found it informative when you said Chief Justice Roberts was "trying to REMOVE the Court from some of the hot button social issues." I noted he said "remove", not something like "distance", which would imply more of a watering down or weakening. I'm guessing that means he wants these issues sent to the states to decide for themselves, and I'm guessing that means he wants to overturn Roe (as well as others), not just weaken it.

I'd think that would be an appealing position to Justice Kennedy (trying to remove the Court from the hot button social issues by sending them to the states to decide for themselves) and that it might mean that Chief Justice Roberts will get Kennedy on board for doing just that.

It also makes me curious if the Court will go further on the Partial Birth Abortion cases than most people are figuring. Just some curious speculation.

Your sharing of what you've learned is greatly appreciated.

i called my local bookstore to order the book and later called back to cancel because my father is visiting from the usa soon and can buy it for less. judging from this blog i may yet have bitten off more than i can chew. evidence, i think, a law course i never passed may be the root cause. it is interesting how case law is created by at times arbitrary individuals positing themselves as the law. miranda rights being laid to rest was around where i last looked at scotus. but i throw my hands up when jan crawford is on the newshour.