RE: Janet Maslin's New Yorker article on Supreme Court confirmation hearings that contributor P. D. Pepe mentions in the Comments, I think you can read it here. It is subscriber-firewalled, but the firewall appears to have been lifted. You have to increase the image size & cursor around the pages.
Arizona v. U.S. -- Immigration Enforcement.
Lyle Denniston of SCOTUSblog: "In sum, that opinion barred Arizona from enforcing three provisions of its controversial anti-immigrant law, S.B. 1070, and put off a constitutional reckoning on a fourth provision. But beyond those bare conclusions, the [Anthony] Kennedy opinion was a strong victory for the notion that immigration policy, under the Constitution and federal laws, is for the federal government, not for the individual states, including those on the borders most affected by illegal entry." Denniston explains the details of this complicated ruling: He also comments on Justice Antonin Scalia's dissent, which he wrote
... was just short of a political talking-points document, essentially choosing up sides in this year's presidential campaign -- indeed, it took sides in a week-old development in the ongoing political controversy over how President Obama is using his powers. That opinion ... reached far outside the record of the case to find reasons to denounce the Obama Administration for supposedly not even wanting 'to enforce the immigration laws as written.' Even for a judge who wears his sentiments on the sleeve of his robe, this was remarkable, and not one of his colleagues would sign on to those remarks.
Dahlia Lithwick of Slate finds the first good argument against cameras in the courtroom: Justice Kagan "continued to look uneasy as Scalia went on scolding Justice Kennedy." Kennedy seemed unperturbed.
Prof. Paul Campos in Salon: Scalia's dissent was "written by a man who obviously no longer cares that he sounds increasingly like a right-wing talk radio host rather than a justice of the Supreme Court, and that his dissents are starting to read more like hastily drafted blog posts than sober judicial opinions. Like many a graying eminence, Scalia is becoming a caricature of his younger self. This is a serious problem, given that the Supreme Court continues to devolve into an institution dominated by cranky senior citizens, who are harder to get rid of than the longest-serving members of the old Soviet politburo. Indeed, Scalia seems headed down the path previously trod by those justices who clearly didn't know when to hang up their robes."
Nadine Zylberberg of the New Yorker dishes up some bon mots from earlier Scalia dissents. They're quite amusing & prove the truism that one can be simultaneously smart & crazy.
Walter Dellinger in Slate: "What is striking to me about the court's decision in the Arizona immigration case is what a total victory this decision was for the U.S. government and for the solicitor general. Press coverage that leads with the notion that the court upheld the 'key provision' or suggesting that the overall outcome was a 'split verdict' seems way off base to me. The feds won."
"Winning Arizona." Alex Koppelman of the New Yorker: The suit became "something of a referendum on the President's recent decision to use the force of 'prosecutorial discretion' to implement his own version of the DREAM Act.... And Obama won that referendum. 'Discretion in the enforcement of immigration law embraces immediate human concerns,' Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the majority. 'The equities of an individual case may turn on many factors, including whether the alien has children born in the United States, long ties to the community, or a record of distinguished military service.'"
Statement from the President.
Victory! Dana Milbank: Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed S.B. 1070 into law & strongly advocated for it, was evidently totally unable to understand the ruling, and put out a statement declaring victory. ...
... M. J. Lee of Politico: "Just hours after hailing the Supreme Court's ruling on Arizona's immigration law as a 'legal victory' for her state, Gov. Jan Brewer changed her tone, accusing the Obama administration of telling her state to 'drop dead.' ... The Obama administration announced that it was revoking agreements with Arizona police over the enforcement of federal immigration laws."
American Tradition Partnership v. Bullock -- the Montana Campaign Finance Law.
David Firestone of the New York Times: "The justices ... must be aware of the transformation of American politics that followed their Citizens United decision in 2010. They have watched as hundreds of millions of special-interest dollars flowed into super PACs, and into secretive advocacy groups that violate the court's own preference for disclosure. But ... when the court had an opportunity to reconsider its application of Citizens United..., the court's five conservative justices struck down -- without oral argument -- a Montana law that prohibited corporate spending in elections.... It's hard not to conclude that the conservative justices ... are quite content with the domination that big money is giving to business interests in this year's races."
E. J. Dionne: "Will everyone please finally admit that conservatives actually don't care a whit about states' rights unless invoking states' rights happens to be helpful to the conservative agenda? ... Breyer wrote..., 'Montana's experience, like considerable experience elsewhere since the Court's decision in Citizens United, casts grave doubt on the Court's supposition that independent expenditures do not corrupt or appear to do so.' ... A Supreme Court nominee named John Roberts ... said during his confirmation hearings that the court should be wary of overturning precedent and should pay attention to factors 'like settled expectations, like the legitimacy of the court, like whether a particular precedent is workable or not, whether a precedent has been eroded by subsequent developments.' ... It's a shame that the current Chief Justice Roberts has so little in common with the John Roberts who testified before the Senate."
"Corrupt Practices" Wins Again. Andrew Leonard of Salon: "Corporate profits are at an all-time high, while wages are at an all-time low. This kind of thing doesn't happen by accident. It requires sustained pressure over time; changes in the tax code and labor laws, decisions by courts. It is the result of billion of dollars worth of lobbying. It represents one of the greatest capitalist success stories of the modern age -- the near complete subversion of a democracy to serve corporate interests. And it's getting worse all the time -- a process exacerbated by Citizens United."
Alex Altman of Time: "... if you oppose Citizens United, the summary reversal is probably a good thing. There is, as [Justice Stephen] Breyer noted, little indication that any of the conservative justices who reshaped U.S. election law through Citizens United are currently inclined to change their minds on the merits of the case, regardless of the consequences that have manifested.... Had the Court taken the case now, the likeliest result would have been for Citizens United to be upheld or extended.... That would make it harder for a Court with a more liberal bent to undo or alter the law going forward."
Miller v. Alabama -- Youthful Murderers.
Lyle Denniston of SCOTUSblog: "At a minimum, any life-without-parole sentence for an adolescent murderer will get very heavy scrutiny if it goes to the Supreme Court. Indeed, the Court said it expects such a sentence to be uncommon from here on." The opinion, written by Justice Elena Kagan, is here (pdf).
In an interview with Gail Sheehy for the Daily Beast, Bill Clinton makes the case for Democrats -- way better than Republicans for the economy, for jobs & for health care; he spells out the consequences of the ACA being struck down. Clinton is still a closer; you'd buy a used car from the guy.
Trip Gabriel & Helene Cooper of the New York Times: "The Supreme Court's decision on Arizona's strict immigration law gave President Obama another shot at energizing Latino voters, while Mitt Romney defended states' aggressive efforts to fight illegal immigration." CW: the article is pretty interesting; the Supremes did not help Romney today, nor did he help himself, but I'm afraid his friends on the Court will be way more helpful Thursday.
Michael O'Brien of NBC News: "Mitt Romney's campaign is weathering increasing media scrutiny of the candidate's stubborn refusal to address major issues..., threatening to transform a standoff with the media into an issue in itself in the campaign. The latest example: [Romney's] ... general refusal to opine directly on today's Supreme Court decision striking down many aspects of Arizona's tough immigration law.... Romney's statement sidestepped the decision itself in an initial written statement, and turned its scrutiny toward President Obama."
"The difference between 'outsourcing' and 'offshoring' ..."
** James Downie of the Washington Post recaps three articles about Mitt Romney & Bain Capital -- all of which we've linked here in previous days. "The Romney of Bain Capital had little time for anything beyond profits. Efficiency and the bottom line ruled. Who cared about the jobs lost, the livelihoods destroyed and the lines crossed, as long as Bain got its money?" Downie equates the fired employees to voter-citizens and Bain investors to his big-money donors today. "If his record as a business leader is any indication, don't think for a moment President Romney will put your vote, or our laws, above his investors." ...
... CW: a couple of stories I read about Romney's weekend lalapalooza for donors in Park City, Utah, noted how comfortable Romney seemed schmoozing with his fatcat friends. If you wonder why Romney is -- by contrast -- so ill-at-ease among us hoi polloi, I'm pretty sure I know: he is afraid he'll inadvertently reveal that he plans to run roughshod over our pitiful little lives. It isn't that he is ashamed of this; he sees nothing wrong with ruining the lives of millions, but he knows he needs to hoodwink us to get what he wants.
Kelly Cernetich of Politics, PA: "Pennsylvania State "House Majority Leader Mike Turzai (R-Allegheny) suggested that the House's end game in passing the Voter ID law was to benefit the GOP politically.... 'Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.' The statement drew a loud round of applause from the audience.... Critics ... called it an admission that [Republicans] passed the bill to make it harder for Democrats to vote -- and not to prevent voter fraud as the legislators claimed." Via Greg Sargent. CW: No kidding. Looks like grounds for a lawsuit.
Other Stuff That Matters
Paul Fahri of the Washington Post: "Major news outlets, print and TV, turn mainly to male sources for their take on abortion, birth control and Planned Parenthood, according to a study by 4th Estate, a research group that monitors campaign coverage. Women don't even rate as the most common sources for reports about 'women's rights,' a catch-all category that excludes reproductive issues, the group said. Women accounted for ... 31 percent of the sources in these reports, with men in the majority, 52 percent, and institutions and organizations comprising the balance. On some topics, such as abortion, men were four to seven times more likely as women to be the ones offering an opinion." At one point in his report, Fahri notes, "Yes, I -- a man -- consulted another man for his opinion on why women's views aren't sought out by media types on women's issues."
Brian Vastag of the Washington Post: "The 2010 BP oil spill accelerated the loss of Louisiana's delicate marshlands, which were already rapidly disappearing before the largest oil spill in U.S. history, a new study reports. As the oil washed into the marshlands, it coated and smothered thick grasses at their edge. When the grass died, deep roots that held the soil together also died, leaving the shore banks of the marshlands to crumble...."
New York Times: "Surviving one of the toughest re-election fights of his career, Representative fended off four challengers on Tuesday to win the Democratic nomination for a 22nd term in Congress."
New York Times: "Senator Orrin G. Hatch, a six-term Utah Republican, fended off a primary challenge from a Tea Party-backed insurgent candidate on Tuesday, a result that showed the power of money, organization and incumbency to overcome grass-roots anger at the Washington establishment."
New York Times: "Nora Ephron, an essayist and humorist in the Dorothy Parker mold (only smarter and funnier, some said) who became one of her era's most successful screenwriters and filmmakers, making romantic comedy hits like 'Sleepless in Seattle' and 'When Harry Met Sally,' died Tuesday night in Manhattan. She was 71."
** Washington Post: 'The University of Virginia governing board voted unanimously Tuesday to reinstate Teresa Sullivan as president, more than two weeks after board leaders had forced her to resign. The board's vote to rescind Sullivan's June 10 resignation completed an unprecedented cycle of events at U-Va. that had plunged the state flagship university into political chaos, with 16 days of mass protests, no-confidence votes and talk of mass faculty defections."
Politico: "In a surprisingly sweeping win for the Obama administration's climate policies, a federal appeals court said Tuesday that the EPA is 'unambiguously correct' in the legal reasoning behind its regulation of greenhouse gases. The Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit strenuously backed the EPA's finding that the climate-altering emissions pose a danger to the public health and welfare. It also upheld the agency's early requirements for vehicles and new industrial plants while rejecting every challenge brought by a host of industry groups, states and other critics."
AP Item: "A top EU official is calling for countries that use the euro to grant a European authority the power to demand changes to their national budgets as part of a grand vision to save the currency. Other ideas in the plan, published Tuesday by European Council President Herman Van Rompuy on the council website, include issuing medium-term debt backed by all countries and a banking union with a single authority that would insure banking deposits and have the power to recapitalize banks directly." ...
... Update: the New York Times' full story on the proposal.
Washington Post: "NATO on Tuesday condemned the downing of a Turkish jet by Syria as 'completely unacceptable,' and Turkey put Syria on notice that it would retaliate for any future violations along its border."
Wall Street Journal: Rupert Murdoch's "News Corp. is considering splitting into two companies, separating its publishing assets from its entertainment businesses. The split would carve off News Corp.'s film and television businesses, including 20th Century Fox film studio, Fox broadcast network and Fox News channel from its newspapers, book publishing assets and education businesses...." ...
... New York Times Update: "Top executives at News Corporation will meet on Tuesday to discuss a potential breakup that would sever the media company's underperforming newspapers from its lucrative entertainment assets. The spinoff, which could be announced as early as this week, comes as News Corporation's newspapers, once the foundation of Rupert Murdoch's $50 billion media empire, face financial strain and a decline in print advertising." ...
... New York Times Update 2: "The spinoff proposal will be reviewed by the News Corporation board on Wednesday and a decision to split up the company could be made as early as Thursday."
"NBC News has obtained a copy of a seven-page letter from House Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa to Barack Obama that raises the stakes in the stand-off between Congress and the attorney general."