I hope everyone had a great Fourth of July! Be sure to check in again on Monday when Law All Over will have its first guest blogger! But for now, the week's best stories:
Paul Clement had a bad week last week; Emily Bazelon wonders if Supreme Court lawyers are overrated.
Slate presents its reader's best suggestions for revising the Constitution: a very fun and thought-provoking list.
Jeff Shesol continues the conversation about John Roberts.
They certainly don't know it, but I think Dahlia Lithwick and Barry Friedman disagree with my Monday post; they think the politicization of the Court ought to have us worried.
Andrew Koppelman isn't dissecting Roberts either.
Joshua Holland shows that people who claim not to like the ACA actually like the specifics more than they think.
Les Leopold thinks we need to take a long look at Europe's vacation laws.
Paul Campos advances the intriguing argument that Roberts essentially wrote BOTH opinions in the ACA decision.
The Chronicle of Higher Ed reveals that Joe Paterno might have had a pattern of intervening in University disciplinary matters.
Also at the Chronicle, a story about the NJ Supreme Court decision to shield student legal clinics from discovery.
The Atlantic weighs in on the new news about Joe Paterno as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment