Citizens United Decided

[Eric Segall]

There's going to be a lot to talk about today but page 13 of Robert's concurring opinion (which I can't cut and paste right now) is, in my opinion, his signal that Casey was wrong and Roe should be overturned.  It is also completely at odds with Alito's opinion in Hein reaffirming Flast (Roberts talks about not affirming bad law on new or unpersuasive grounds).

Also, as far as I can tell after a very quick read, neither Kennedy's nor Roberts' opinions, both of which talk about stare decisis a lot, mention the Casey discussion. For those of us highly critical of Casey on this point, this omission is glaring.

So much for Roberts' incremental, umpire approach to the law :)

Eric



>>> Lawrence Solum <lsolum at gmail.com> 1/21/2010 10:46 AM >>>
Links on Legal Theory Blog:
http://lsolum.typepad.com/legaltheory/2010/01/citizens-united-decided-major-changes-in-campaign-finace-laws.html 
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu 
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof 

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.