Tuesday, January 17, 2006
Justice Roberts Fails His First Test
As BlueOregon points out (HT: John Cole), his opinion in this case runs, shall we say, somewhat contrary to the views he professed to hold during his confirmation hearings. It, in my opinion, certainly isn't an opinion that's respectful of state's rights, but as we've seen from Scalia in the Raich case, that seems to matter little to certain "strict constrictionalists" when it comes to certain topics of morality.
I'm not quite understanding why Thomas dissented to the ruling in Raich (siding with the right of the state to control medicinal use of controlled substances) and yet dissented in this case (side with the right of the feds to say what is and isn't a medicinal use of a controlled substance). That seems, well, totally inconsistant.