Posts Tagged ‘SCOTUS’

US Supreme Court calls almost one quarter of blacks retards

June 12, 2014

In the recent Hall v. Florida decision, the US Supreme Court (besides demonstrating a limited understanding of statistics; but what do you expect, they went to law school) has effectively raised the IQ threshold with regards to the level of mental handicap to bar execution to 75. However, when one consideres that the median black American IQ is 85, with standard deviation 13.5 (here), this cutoff has a z-score of (75-85)/13.5≈0.74, which corresponds to a percentile of 23%. Thus, SCOTUS has effectively called almost a quarter of American blacks retarded.


SCOTUS Preview

November 11, 2008

SCOTUSBlog has a preview of the expected oral arguments to be heard by the Supreme Court tomorrow in the case of Pleasant Grove City, et al., v. Summum.

SCOTUS Decisions

June 28, 2008

In addition to DC v. Heller and Davis v. FEC, the Supreme Court has had a few other decisions of note recently. While there has been much discussion of the opinion in Kennedy v. Louisiana (no extending the death penalty to child rape), particularly in the form of dismahy on the right, what was of more note to me, and likely many other Alaskans, was Exxon v. Baker, about the punitive damages from the Exxon Valdez oil spill. While I’m not particularly pleased that they chose this particular case to do so, I do think the general arbitrariness of punitive damages needed addressed.

That’s Fast

June 26, 2008

Apparently, NRA V.P. Wayne LaPierre just announced on Fox News that the organization will be filing suit in Chicago to overturn that city’s handgun ban in the wake of DC v. Heller, according to this NRO Campaign Spot post.

Update: The video from Fox News is available online here.

Millionaire’s Amendment

June 26, 2008

Ed Whelan at NRO’s Bench Memos blog takes the time to analyze another of the Supreme Court decision released today: the 5-4 decision [pdf] in Davis v. FEC striking down the so-called “Millionaire’s Amendment” of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA).


June 26, 2008

There’s also much talk of the DC v Heller decision over at the Volokh Conspiracy. This is to be expected, not only because it is a legal blog, but because site founder Eugene Volokh and contributor Randy Barnett are both among the legal scholars cited in the opinion.

NRO on DC v. Heller

June 26, 2008

The editors at National Review give their take on the Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller.

DC v. Heller Decided

June 26, 2008

The Supreme Court has reached a decision, 5-4, on the DC gun ban case District of Columbia v. Heller. The opinion, by Justice Scalia, is available here [pdf]. The bottom line: the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms, and to use such arms in self-defense; thus, the DC handgun ban, and trigger lock requirement, are invalidated. More analysis is available at SCOTUSblog here, here, here, and here.

This is a great first step. Next, I imagine, is a case out of one of the states (say involving Chicago’s gun ban), testing the applicability of Fourteenth Amendment incorporation to this ruling.

Heller analysis

June 15, 2008

Mike O’Shea has an article at Concurring Opinions offering analysis and predictions on the impending Supreme Court decision on the Second Amendment case DC v. Heller, which could come as early as tomorrow, or as late as the 23rd.

This is interesting…

May 2, 2008

From “Could Constitutional Flaw Unravel Eight Years of Patent Board Rulings?
In an appeal that has just petitioned the Supreme Court to be heard, a company is making the argument, based on the careful research of Gworge Washington University legal scholar John Duffy, that the majority of the appeals judges on the PTO’s Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences were appointed in a manner that violates the Constitution’s appointments clause. If it is ruled so, the hundreds of decisions made by these judges in the last 8 years would be rendered null.
My guess is that, considering the clear case made for the unconstituionality of the appointmens on one hand, and the multitude of decisions worth billions of dollars that would need redone on the other hand, the Supreme Court will simply deny certiorari, and thus sidestep the issue.