Monday, June 16, 2014
SBA list v Driehaus unanimously reversed, opinion by Thomas.
Doesn't mention my previous case Majors v Abell, which had come up in some of the briefs,
because today's opinion only discusses Supreme Court cases.
The court distinguishes Golden v Zwickler, getting the facts wrong today int he same way the court got the facts wrong in 1968. Zwickler's concern wasn't with his particular congressman; he was concerned about US policy in Israel, and wanted his congressman, whoever that would be, to do more.
But it is not unreasonable to distinguish the cases today based on how the court characterized the facts in 1968. Driehaus had moved to Africa, Zwickler's congressman had been appointed a federal judge and left congress, so the cases have some similarity.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-193_omq2.pdf
This was the expected result in the case, and the court stayed away from discussing the merits,
which remain unresolved, but the statute is unlikely to withstand scrutiny.
Meanwhile in Abramski v US, the liberal wing of the court, 5-4, upheld an infringement on the right to bear arms.
Doesn't mention my previous case Majors v Abell, which had come up in some of the briefs,
because today's opinion only discusses Supreme Court cases.
The court distinguishes Golden v Zwickler, getting the facts wrong today int he same way the court got the facts wrong in 1968. Zwickler's concern wasn't with his particular congressman; he was concerned about US policy in Israel, and wanted his congressman, whoever that would be, to do more.
But it is not unreasonable to distinguish the cases today based on how the court characterized the facts in 1968. Driehaus had moved to Africa, Zwickler's congressman had been appointed a federal judge and left congress, so the cases have some similarity.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-193_omq2.pdf
This was the expected result in the case, and the court stayed away from discussing the merits,
which remain unresolved, but the statute is unlikely to withstand scrutiny.
Meanwhile in Abramski v US, the liberal wing of the court, 5-4, upheld an infringement on the right to bear arms.
Comments:
Post a Comment
