On Friday, Justice Ginsburg gave a speech in Cooperstown, New York in which she reviewed the past Term.  (Thanks to How Appealing for the link from Jess Bravin"™s Twitter feed.)  The Justice began with a selection of questions from oral argument (which she then cited as illustrating "why the Court does not plan to permit televising oral arguments anytime soon") and then discussed many cases from the Term, often summarizing both the majority and dissenting opinions.  Among other things, she described Justice Alito"™s dissent in Snyder v. Phelps, the funeral protest case, as "heart-felt."  Discussing Arizona Free Enterprise Club"™s Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett, in which a bare majority of the Court declared a public campaign financing scheme unconstitutional, she indicated that "[a]ll the democracy money can buy, I believe, is not what the First Amendment orders."  Constitutional Law Prof Blog also posts the text of the speech.

Writing at PrawfsBlawg, Roderick Hills also discusses the Court"™s opinion in the Arizona campaign-finance case.  He criticizes the Court"™s treatment of its precedent, arguing that that "one cannot make any claim to intellectual coherence if one invokes the distinction between "subsidies"™ and "penalties"™ in one case (Regan v. Taxation With Representation) to eliminate a First Amendment violation only to ignore the distinction in another case [Arizona Free Enterprise] to create a violation."

Posted in Round-up

Recommended Citation: James Bickford, Monday round-up, SCOTUSblog (Jul. 25, 2011, 9:59 AM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2011/07/monday-round-up-86/