Law professor Randy Barnett, writing in the Opinion Journal, wonders whether the Supreme Court’s new federalism — which he describes as “the revival of the ideas that judiciary should protect the role of the states within the federal system and enforce the textual limits on the powers of Congress” — will “survive the Roberts court.” Actually, it’s questionable whether the new federalism made it to the end of the Rehnquist court, as Barnett acknowledges. So even if President Bush is able to replace both Rehnquist and O’Connnor (the other leading proponent of the new federalism) with like-minded federalists, it’s not clear how much use the Court will have for such federalism. For his part, Roberts seems attentive to concerns over federalism, if his opinion in the “toad” case, Rancho Viejo v. Norton, is a fair indicator.
Via Real Clear Politics.
-
-
Most Read on Power Line
Donate to PL
-
Our Favorites
- American Greatness
- American Mind
- American Story
- American Thinker
- Aspen beat
- Babylon Bee
- Belmont Club
- Churchill Project
- Claremont Institute
- Daily Torch
- Federalist
- Gatestone Institute
- Hollywood in Toto
- Hoover Institution
- Hot Air
- Hugh Hewitt
- InstaPundit
- Jewish World Review
- Law & Liberty
- Legal Insurrection
- Liberty Daily
- Lileks
- Lucianne
- Michael Ramirez Cartoons
- Michelle Malkin
- Pipeline
- RealClearPolitics
- Ricochet
- Steyn Online
- Tim Blair
Media
Subscribe to Power Line by Email
Temporarily disabled
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.