Overruled

by Damon Root

  57.Robert H. Bork, “Neutral Principles and Some First Amendment Problems,” Indiana Law Journal 47 (1971): 1-2.

  58.Bork, “Neutral Principles,” 9.

  59.Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., “The Gas-Stoker’s Strike,” American Law Review 7 (1873): 583-584.

  60.Bork, “Neutral Principles,” 10-11.

  61.Bork, “Neutral Principles,” 10.

  62.Bork, “Neutral Principles,” 11.

  63.Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 164 (1973).

  64.Roe, 410 U.S. at 165.

  65.Roe, 410 U.S. at 153.

  66.Roe, 410 U.S. at 172.

  67.Roe, 410 U.S. at 174.

  68.Robert H. Bork, The Tempting of America: The Political Seduction of the Law (New York: Touchstone, 1991), 116.

  69.Bork, Tempting of America, 110.

  70.Bork, Tempting of America, 126.

  Chapter Four

  1.Charles Lane, “Roberts Listed in Federalist Society ’97-98 Directory,” Washington Post, July 25, 2005.

  2.For a detailed account of the Federalist Society’s origins, see Steven M. Teles, The Rise of the Conservative Legal Movement: The Battle for Control of the Law (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008).

  3.For an excellent account of John Roberts’s 2005 confirmation hearings, see Jan Crawford Greenburg, Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court (New York: Penguin Books, 2007).

  4.Jason DeParle, “Debating the Subtle Sway of the Federalist Society,” New York Times, August 1, 2005.

  5.Roger Pilon, “McCarthy Liberals,” New York Post, July 29, 2005.

  6.Steven Calabresi, Lee Liberman, and David McIntosh, “Proposal for a Symposium on the Legal Ramifications of the New Federalism,” 1982, quoted in John J. Miller, A Gift of Freedom: How the John M. Olin Foundation Changed America (New York: Encounter Books, 2006), 89.

  7.Interview with Eugene Meyer, March 2010.

  8.Edwin M. Meese III, Speech to the American Bar Association, July 9, 1985. A transcript of the speech is available at http://www.justice.gov/ag/aghistory/meese/1985/07-09-1985.pdf.

  9.Edwin M. Meese III, “A Return to Constitutional Interpretation from Judicial Law-Making,” New York Law School Law Review 40 (1996): 925.

  10.Robert H. Bork, The Tempting of America: The Political Seduction of the Law (New York: Touchstone, 1991), 2.

  11.Bork, Tempting of America, 139.

  12.Bernard H. Siegan, Economic Liberties and the Constitution (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980), 6.

  13.Siegan, Economic Liberties, 21.

  14.Siegan, Economic Liberties, 324.

  15.Siegan, Economic Liberties, 15.

  16.Siegan, Economic Liberties, 114.

  17.Siegan, Economic Liberties, 17.

  18.Bork, Tempting of America, 224-225.

  19.The statute is quoted in Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186, 200 (1986).

  20.Bowers, 478 U.S. at 190.

  21.Bowers, 478 U.S. at 194.

  22.Bowers, 478 U.S. at 196.

  23.Bork, Tempting of America, 117.

  24.Interview with Roger Pilon, November 2013.

  25.Roger Pilon, email to the author, March 17, 2010.

  26.Pilon interview.

  27.Roger Pilon, “On the Foundations of Justice,” speech to the Philadelphia Society, April 10, 1981, in The Intercollegiate Review (Fall/Winter 1981): 5.

  28.Pilon interview.

  29.Roger Pilon, “Constitutional Visions,” Reason, December 1990, 41.

  30.Roger Pilon, “Rethinking Judicial Restraint,” Wall Street Journal, February 1, 1991.

  31.Pilon interview.

  32.Antonin Scalia, “Economic Affairs as Human Affairs,” Cato Journal vol. 4, no. 3 (Winter 1985): 705-706.

  33.Richard A. Epstein, “Judicial Review: Reckoning on Two Kinds of Error,” Cato Journal vol. 4, no. 3 (Winter 1985): 712.

  34.Epstein, “Judicial Review,” 714-715.

  35.Epstein, “Judicial Review,” 717-718.

  36.Pilon, email to author.

  37.Stephen Macedo, The New Right v. The Constitution (Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute, 1986), 27.

  38.Richard A. Epstein, Takings: Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1985), 331-332.

  39.Epstein, Takings, x.

  40.Bork, Tempting of America, 230.

  41.Charles A. Fried, Order and Law: Arguing the Reagan Revolution: A Firsthand Account (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1991), 183.

  42.Cato 25: 25 Years at the Cato Institute: The 2001 Annual Report (Washington, D.C.: The Cato Institute, 2001), 14.

  43.Roger Pilon, “Proposal for a Center for Constitutional Studies to be Located at the Cato Institute, Washington, D.C., Under the Direction of Roger Pilon, Ph.D., J.D.,” October 11, 1988, 4.

  44.Pilon, “Proposal,” 8.

  45.Pilon, “Proposal,” 4.

  46.Pilon interview.

  47.Brief of the Cato Institute as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners, 2, Lawrence v. Texas 539 U.S. 558 (2003).

  48.Cato Brief, Lawrence v. Texas, 9.

  49.Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. at 558, transcript of oral argument, March 26, 2003, 3-4.

  50.Lawrence transcript, 16-17.

  51.Lawrence transcript, 17.

  52.Lawrence transcript, 9-10.

  53.Lawrence transcript, 38.

  54.Lawrence transcript, 42-43.

  55.Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. at 558, 562.

  56.Lawrence, 539 U.S. at 578.

  57.Lawrence, 539 U.S. at 602.

  58.Lawrence, 539 U.S. at 592.

  59.Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702, 721 (1997).

  60.Lawrence, 539 U.S. at 603.

  61.Jeffrey Rosen, “Second Opinions,” The New Republic, May 4, 2012.

  62.Randy E. Barnett, “Kennedy’s Libertarian Revolution,” National Review Online, July 10, 2003. Available at http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/207453/kennedys-libertarian-revolution/randy-barnett.

  Chapter Five

  1.Dan Morgan, Sarah Cohen, and Gilbert M. Gaul, “Dairy Industry Crushed Innovator Who Bested Price-Control System,” Washington Post, December 10, 2006.

  2.Hettinga v. United States, 677 F.3d 471, 480 (D.C. Cir. 2012).

  3.United States v. Carolene Products Co., 304 U.S. 144, 152 (1938).

  4.Williamson v. Lee Optical Inc., 348 U.S. 483, 488 (1955).

  5.Hettinga, 677 F.3d at 482-483.

  6.Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45, 75 (1905).

  7.Lehnhausen v. Lake Shore Auto Parts Co., 410 U.S. 356, 364 (1973).

  8.Interview with William H. “Chip” Mellor, November 2013.

  9.Clint Bolick, Unfinished Business: A Civil Rights Strategy for America’s Third Century (San Francisco: Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy, 1990).

  10.Jonathan W. Emord, Freedom, Technology and the First Amendment (San Francisco: Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy, 1991).

  11.Mark L. Pollot, Grand Theft and Petit Larceny: Property Rights in America (San Francisco: Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy, 1993).

  12.Bolick, Unfinished Business, 52.

  13.Bolick, Unfinished Business, 76.

  14.Interview with Clint Bolick, December 2013.

  15.Clarence Thomas has also acknowledged an intellectual debt to Walter Williams. Meeting the libertarian economist in 1980 “was a landmark event for me,” Thomas wrote in his memoir. “Very few black scholars were using that kind of research-
driven thinking to study the everyday problems of blacks, and Dr. Williams’ findings were as exciting to me as they were upsetting to those who still believed that government regulation was the only way to improve the lot of black people.” Clarence Thomas, My Grandfather’s Son: A Memoir (New York: Harper, 2007), 126.

  16.Walter E. Williams, The State against Blacks (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1982), xvi.

  17.Williams, The State against Blacks, 125.

  18.Clint Bolick, Changing Course: Civil Rights at the Crossroads (New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Books, 1988), 123.

  19.Bolick, Changing Course, 125.

  20.Bolick, Changing Course, 122.

  21.Mellor interview.

  22.Craigmiles v. Giles, 312 F.3d 220, 225 (6th Cir. 2002) (internal quotations omitted).

  23.Craigmiles, 318 F.3d at 229.

  24.Mellor interview.

  25.Powers v. Harris, 379 F.3d 1208, 1221-1222 (10th Cir. 2004).

  26.Powers, 379 F.3d at 1218.

  27.Petition for a Writ of Certiorari at 9-10, Powers v. Harris, no. 04-716, November 22, 2004.

  28.Carolene Products, 304 U.S. at 144, 152 n. 4.

  29.Berman v. Parker, 348 U.S. 26, 32 (1954).

  30.Berman, 348 U.S. at 36.

  31.“Donald Trump’s House of Cards,” The Economist, August 30, 1997.

  32.David M. Herszenhorn, “Widowed Homeowner Foils Trump Bid in Atlantic City,” New York Times, July 21, 1998.

  33.For a superb account of the New London controversy, see Jeff Benedict, Little Pink House: A True Story of Defiance and Courage (New York: Grand Central Publishing, 2009).

  34.Interview with Scott Bullock, November 2013. Ensuing Bullock quotes from same interview.

  35.Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005).

  36.Kelo v. City of New London, 843 A.2d 500, 527 (Conn. 2004).

  37.Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, 467 U.S. 229, 242-243 (1984).

  38.Bullock interview.

  39.Brief of Petitioners at 9, Kelo, 545 U.S. at 469.

  40.Brief of Petitioners, Kelo, 11.

  41.Brief of Amici Curiae National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, AARP, Hispanic Alliance of Atlantic County, Inc., Citizens in Action, Cramer Hill Resident Association, Inc., and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference in Support of Petitioners at 3-4, Kelo, 545 U.S. at 469.

  42.Kelo, 545 U.S. at 469, transcript of oral argument, February 22, 2005, 3.

  43.Kelo transcript, 3-4.

  44.Kelo transcript, 6-7.

  45.Kelo transcript, 9.

  46.Kelo transcript, 10-11.

  47.Berman, 348 U.S. at 32.

  48.Kelo transcript, 12.

  49.Kelo transcript, 14.

  50.Kelo transcript, 14-15.

  51.Bullock interview.

  52.United States v. James Daniel Good Real Prop., 510 U.S. 43, 61 (1993).

  53.Kelo transcript, 26-27.

  54.Kelo transcript, 28-29.

  55.Bullock interview.

  56.Kelo transcript, 30.

  57.Bullock interview.

  58.Kelo transcript, 37.

  59.Kelo transcript, 55.

  60.Bullock interview.

  61.Kelo, 545 U.S. at 469, 480.

  62.Kelo, 545 U.S. at 483.

  63.Kelo, 545 U.S. at 494.

  64.Kelo, 545 U.S. at 521-522.

  65.“Congress Assails Domain Ruling,” Washington Times, July 1, 2005.

  66.The results of the 2008 Associated Press/National Constitution Center Poll are available at http://www.constitutioncenter.org/media/files/poll-ap-ncc-poll-2008.pdf.

  67.Mellor interview.

  68.Norwood v. Horney, 110 St.3d 353 (Ohio, 2006).

  69.Nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to be Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States: Hearings Before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, 111th Cong., 1st Sess. (2009).

  70.Kelo, 545 U.S. at 483.

  71.Jeff Benedict, “Apology Adds an Epilogue to Kelo Case,” Hartford Courant, September 18, 2011.

  Chapter Six

  1.J. Harvie Wilkinson III, “Of Guns, Abortions, and the Unraveling Rule of Law,” Virginia Law Review 95, vol. 2 (April 2009): 254.

  2.Interview with Clark Neily, December 2013.

  3.Sanford Levinson, “The Embarrassing Second Amendment,” Yale Law Journal 99 (1989): 642.

  4.Adam Liptak, “A Liberal Case for Gun Rights Sways Judiciary,” New York Times, May 6, 2007.

  5.Neily interview. Ensuing Neily quotes from same interview.

  6.Interview with William H. “Chip” Mellor, November 2013.

  7.Neily interview.

  8.Interview with Alan Gura, December 2013.

  9.Neily interview.

  10.Gura interview.

  11.Neily interview.

  12.Parker v. District of Columbia, 478 F.3d 370 (D.C. Cir. 2007).

  13.Neily interview.

  14.District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), transcript of oral argument, March 18, 2008, 3-4.

  15.Heller transcript, 6.

  16.Heller transcript, 4.

  17.Heller transcript, 14.

  18.Heller transcript, 5-6.

  19.Heller transcript, 8.

  20.Neily interview.

  21.Heller transcript, 18-19.

  22.Neily interview.

  23.John Ashcroft, attorney general of the United States, to James Jay Baker, executive director, National Rifle Association, May 17, 2001, Office of the Attorney General.

  24.Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae at 8, Heller, 554 U.S. at 570.

  25.Heller transcript, 40.

  26.Heller transcript, 44.

  27.Neily interview.

  28.Heller transcript, 50-53.

  29.Heller transcript, 54.

  30.Heller transcript, 57-58.

  31.See Ralph Ketcham, ed., The Anti-Federalist Papers and the Constitutional Convention Debates (New York: Mentor, 1986).

  32.Heller transcript, 73.

  33.Heller transcript, 73-74.

  34.District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S. Ct. 2783, 2799 (2008).

  35.Heller, 128 S. Ct. at 2801.

  36.Heller, 128 S. Ct. at 2817.

  37.Heller, 128 S. Ct. at 2816-2817.

  38.Heller, 128 S. Ct. at 2822.

  39.Heller, 128 S. Ct. at 2828.

  40.Heller, 128 S. Ct. at 2846-2847.

  41.Colegrove v. Green, 328 U.S. 549, 556 (1946).

  42.Heller, 128 S. Ct. at 2846 n. 39.

  43.Gura interview.

  44.Gitlow v. United States, 268 U.S. 652, 666 (1925).

  45.Gura interview.

  46.Eric Foner, Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877, Francis Parkman Prize Edition (New York: History Book Club, 2005), 530.

  47.Heller, 128 S. Ct. at 2813 n. 23.

  48.Gura interview.

  49.Neily interview.

  50.Antonin Scalia, A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997), 46-47.

  51.Marcia Coyle, The Roberts Court: The Struggle for the Constitution (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2013), 163.

  52.Chicago v. Morales, 527 U.S. 41, 85 (1999).

  53.Scalia, A Matter of Interpretation, 25.

  54.Gura interview.

  55.Robert Bork, The Tempting of America: The Political Seduction of the Law (New York: Touchstone, 1991), 37-39.

&nb
sp; 56.Antonin Scalia, “Economic Affairs as Human Affairs,” Cato Journal vol. 4, no. 3 (Winter 1985): 706.

  57.Gura interview.

  58.Brief of the American Civil Rights Union, Let Freedom Ring, Committee for Justice, and the Family Research Council as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners at 6-7, McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025 (2010).

  59.Ken Klukowski and Ken Blackwell, “A Gun Case or Pandora’s Box?,” Washington Times, December 11, 2009.

  60.Gura interview.

  61.Motion of Respondents-Supporting-Petitioners for Divided Argument at 2, McDonald, 561 U.S. at 3025.

  62.Opposition to Motion of National Rifle Association, Et. Al., for Divided Argument at 1, McDonald, 561 U.S. at 3025.

  63.Gura interview.

  64.McDonald, 561 U.S. at 3025, transcript of oral argument, March 2, 2010, 3-4.

  65.McDonald transcript, 6-7.

  66.McDonald v. Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020, 3062 (2010).

  67.A lifelong advocate of armed self-defense, Frederick Douglass once wrote, “the liberties of the American people were dependent upon the ballot-box, the jury-box, and the cartridge-box,” and added, “without these no class of people could live and flourish in this country.” Frederick Douglass, Life and Times of Frederick Douglass, in Douglass, Writings (New York: Library of America, 1994), 816-817.

  68.McDonald, 130 S. Ct. at 3088.

  69.McDonald, 130 S. Ct. at 3086.

  70.Gura interview.

  71.Clint Bolick, Unfinished Business: A Civil Rights Strategy for America’s Third Century (San Francisco: Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy, 1990), 86.

  Chapter Seven

  1.Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (2005), transcript of oral argument, November 29, 2004, 25.

  2.Raich, 545 U.S. at 1, 9.

  3.Interview with Randy Barnett, March 2012.

  4.Raich, 57-58.

  5.Department of Health and Human Services v. Florida, no. 11-398, transcript of oral argument, March 27, 2012, 54.

  6.Orin Kerr, email to author, February 22, 2012.

  7.Interview with Ilya Shapiro, February 2012.

  8.Matt Cover, “When Asked Where the Constitution Authorizes Congress to Order Americans to Buy Health Insurance, Pelosi Says: ‘Are You Serious?’” CNS News, October 22, 2009. Available at http://www.cnsnews.com/node/55971.

  9.Dept. of HHS v. Florida, transcript, March 27, 2012, 11-12.

  10.James Madison, Federalist 42, in The Federalist Papers, ed. Clinton Rossiter (New York: Mentor, 1961), 267.