Our law is now so riddled with special exceptions for special rights that our decisions deliver neither predictability nor the promise of a judiciary bound by the rule of law – dissent of Justice Clarence Thomas (Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, Docket Number: 15-274, Date Argued: 03/02/16, Supreme Court ruled 5-3, June 27, 2016)

Our law is now so riddled with special exceptions for special rights that our decisions deliver neither predictability nor the promise of a judiciary bound by the rule of law - dissent of Justice Clarence Thomas (Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, Docket Number: 15-274, Date Argued: 03/02/16, Supreme Court ruled 5-3, June 27, 2016)
As the Court applies whatever standard it likes to any given case, nothing but empty words separates our constitutional decisions from judicial fiat
As the Court applies whatever standard it likes to any given case, nothing but empty words separates our constitutional decisions from judicial fiat
the majority reappoints this Court as  “the country’s ex officio medical board with powers to disapprove medical and operative practices and standards throughout the United States”
the majority reappoints this Court as

“the country’s ex officio medical board with powers to disapprove medical and operative practices and standards throughout the United States”
image
The Court should abandon the pretense that anything other than policy preferences underlies its balancing of constitutional rights and interests in any given case
Unless the Court abides by one set of rules to adjudicate constitutional rights, it will continue reducing constitutional law to policy-driven value judgments until the last shreds of its legitimacy disappear
Unless the Court abides by one set of rules to adjudicate constitutional rights, it will continue reducing constitutional law to policy-driven value judgments until the last shreds of its legitimacy disappear
image
The majority’s embrace of a jurisprudence of rights-specific exceptions and balancing tests is

“a regrettable concession of defeat—an acknowledgement that we have passed the point where ‘law,’ properly speaking, has any further application”

Scalia, The Rule of Law as a Law of Rules, 56 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1175, 1182 (1989)

I respectfully dissent
image
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/579/15-274/dissent5.html

Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/579/15-274/

https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2015/15-274

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s