The Blogging Marathon Continues

Couple of further thoughts:

1.  The Administration’s decision to “fast-track” this case to the Court and bypass en banc review in the 11th Circuit may have paid off. One wonders if the Chief Justice would have voted differently in a non-election year.

2.  The recent “inside” accounts of the deliberations in Citizens United suggests that Roberts really is the swing vote on this Court.  In that case he was the most reluctant to go along.  Here he was even more reluctant.  And who knows what happened in NAMUNDO (the Voting Rights Act case).

You may also like...

1 Response

  1. Andrew Selbst says:

    It’s right to compare this to NAMUDNO. The major similarity is that they’re both Roberts opinions with the gratuitous dicta you mentioned in a post earlier. I agree completely with you that it’s putting the lie to his “minimalism,” but I don’t think it’s because he’s the swing vote. I think he thinks it’s easier to enshrine his vision of the Constitution over a series of long cases creating established precedent and slow movement, so as to avoid the Roe v. Wade problem. So he’s writing these speeches, inviting more litigation, waiting for his chance. Hence the Section 5 cases coming up next year, as well as, arguably, Parents Involved (plurality opinion didn’t control, so same effect) -> Fisher.