Last week, the Supreme Court teed up yet another big constitutional showdown over the constitutionality of affirmative action programs by agreeing to review the decision of the Fifth Circuit in Fisher v. University of Texas, which held that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment permits the University of Texas at Austin to consider race as one of a multitude of factors in selecting a diverse student body.
You are here
Roughly five weeks after hearing oral argument in Shelby County v. Holder, the D.C. Circuit on Monday will hear oral argument in LaRoque v. Holder, a companion case to Shelby County raising a similar constitutional challenge to Congress’ 2006 near-unanimous renewal of the preclearance requirement of the Voting Rights Act.
The issue in Blueford goes to the heart of the Double Jeopardy Clause’s guarantee against abuse of power by the government: may the government subject a criminal defendant to a second trial on charges that the jury unanimously rejected simply because the jury deadlocked on other, lesser charges?
What Senator Lee is doing is reprehensible, but he’s hardly the only obstructionist in the Senate, and he’s not the only one who should be feeling the heat.
The Constitution guarantees equality under the law to every American and prohibits the government from treating any individuals as second-class, inferior persons.
While the Heritage Foundation factsheet on nullification is encouraging, it will be interesting to see how their takedown of nullification is received at the Conservative Political Action Conference today where the 10th Amendment Center is planning to screen a movie promoting the idea of nullification. This will be an ideal test for determining if conservatives will choose to adhere to the Constitution’s text and history or will instead blithely embrace the fairy tales about the Constitution being peddled by the tea party.