The first oral argument sitting of the Term is under the justices' belts but what does it show about the justices' interactions and what does it mean for the decisions down the line?
I find this analysis absolutely fascinating, investigating avenues I never knew existed.
But somehow I get the impression that this Court is more interested in clockwork than who winds the clock … and why. Is the rule of law valid when enacted by the lawless?
I find this analysis absolutely fascinating, investigating avenues I never knew existed.
But somehow I get the impression that this Court is more interested in clockwork than who winds the clock … and why. Is the rule of law valid when enacted by the lawless?
I would expect no less.