‘);
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-1609270282082-0’); });
}
During my junior year in college, 1960–1961, I took the Constitutional Law course given by Dean Leonard W. Levy, one of the country’s foremost con law scholars. In addition to his immense store of knowledge, he acknowledged the wisdom of common sense, noting that the response to Supreme Court decisions may depend on whose ox is gored. And he advised his students, in writing papers, “Strike while the iron is hot.”
‘);
googletag.cmd.push(function () {
googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-1609268089992-0’);
});
}
This New York Times headline, the lead story for November 23, has gotten my iron hot — and dander up. The print edition headline for the story: “JUSTICES DECIDE / AGAINST TRUMP / ON TAX RETURNS.” These four words appear below: “WIN FOR HOUSE PANEL.” (Here is the headline for the online version.)
This is to suggest that the justices decided not merely “against Trump,” but for oppressive, unlimited government.
Did the Supreme Court merely decide against former president Trump, or did the justices decide against due process, legislative legitimacy, regular order in the House of Representatives, indeed, the Constitution itself? Clearly, and in weeks, months, and years to come, the American spirit of liberty will lead most observers to reflect that the justices did not only decide “against Trump,” but also rule in favor of an irresponsible, totalitarian government.