I realize it's not high on anyone's list of "major" cases of the Term, and that Justice Kagan's deliberately minimalist majority opinion merely resolves one discrete question (at a fairly high level of generality, at that), but boy, last week's Hunter case ...[1]
www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25p...
Former Deputy Solicitor General Michael Dreeben writes on Humphrey’s Executor, the landmark decision the Roberts Court seems poised to overturn.
"In 1935, the political polarities were reversed ... conservative voices viewed it as a justified and necessary response to unchecked presidential power."
What we were all waiting for--a Rooker-Feldman Doctrine 5-4 split!
... sure does tee up a slew of interesting questions, and potentially is a great teaching case for many courses, e.g., FedCourts; ConLaw (is there any in the case?!); Criminal Law; Criminal Procedure; Jurisprudence; seminars on the SCOTUS, on unconstitutional conditions, on carceral policy; etc.
Only three?
Damn.
Oh, and Orangutan Law, too.
... if Congress *didn't* give the executive branch discretion to preclude enforcement of the Act where it concludes there are good reasons (here, a nominal national security rationale, but it could be anything) for allowing the defendant to disregard the statutory limits.
Seriously.
[3]
RFK Jr. says that HPV vaccine is “dangerous and defective”.
A new study from England shows that HPV vaccines have reduced deaths from cervical cancer to ZERO for women aged 20-24.
Significant reductions in older age groups were observed as well, though the latter have lower vaccination coverage.
This is excellent; thanks, Greg
Our findings provide the first robust national-level evidence, albeit observational,
that high HPV vaccination coverage is associated with a substantial reduction in cervical
cancer deaths. This is sh...
