The Latest Breaking News from Gorsuch

I don't think there will be a five vote bloc on standing or the remedy.

Does the bias exist? Is it a good thing? What does it mean for law students at lower-ranked schools? What does mean about me?

Justices Thomas and Gorsuch have a much greater appetite for reconsidering prior precedent than the other justices do.

Justice Gorsuch is still at Step 0 of overruling Chevron.

From Justice Gorsuch's dissent from denial of certiorari in Khorrami v. Arizona: The State of Arizona convicted Ramin Khorrami of serious crimes before an 8-member jury. On appeal, Mr. Khorrami sought a new trial, arguing that the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U. S. Constitution guarantee individuals like him…

I will conclude this series of posts by considering the variants of MFN that affect the way strict scrutiny is applied. MFN-6, ubiquitous in the Covid cases, makes strict scrutiny impossible to satisfy, by treating as equivalents regulated actions that are radically different in their effects on the pertinent state…

Let's move on to other variants. One looks at whether a law has any exceptions at all, and, if religious reasons are not among those exceptions, automatically applies strict scrutiny. It was proposed by Justice Kavanaugh in his dissent in Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley v. Sisolak, and possibly embraced by…

Here I will consider how the MFN theory was expanded to its present bloated proportions. Recently members of the Court, and sometimes a majority, have developed variants of MFN that are far more far-reaching and skeptical than the modest heightened scrutiny suggested by Lukumi. The key innovation, pioneered by Justice…

Eugene has kindly invited me to contribute a series of posts, briefly describing my taxonomy of new variants of the most-favored-nation theory of religious liberty (forthcoming in the Iowa Law Review). I'm particularly pleased by the invitation, because I wrote the piece in conscious emulation of the kind of careful…

The major questions doctrine inverts the Chevron doctrine, is indeterminate, and, as a practical matter, will encourage courts to engage in something more akin to political punditry than law.

As (yet another) Texas v. U.S. slides from the shadow docket to the rocket docket