This is one of those cases in which traditional conservative/liberal or pragmatist/non-pragmatist divides on the Court would seem to be thrown out the window because there is just soooooo much going on. There are so many different topics that the justices could pursue here. And all of it stems from (wish it was surprising) depressingly shoddy law enforcement in Texas. While the issue of the effect of international treaties on US courts is getting most of the press's attention in this case, it also involves federal/state relations, and one of the most breath-taking assertions of of presidential power this White House has made yet. And since Bush seems to think his personal authority is on par with that of, oh, let's say Charles I of England or Ivan the Terrible, that is saying something.
Click here to read Charles Lane's review of proceedings in The Washington Post, and here to read Emily Bazelon's dynamite coverage on Slate.
Posted by armand at March 29, 2005 09:12 AM | TrackBack | Posted to Law and the Courts