*This is a slightly edited version of a post I posted here yesterday afternoon and have removed.  There’s also an addendum about an op-ed piece by Martin O’Malley in today’s Washington Post. —- Okay, so all you politics obsessives probably heard about a comment Martin O’Malley made to NPR’s Morning Edition host Steve Innskeep during an interview […]

Correction appended below. —- Scott Lemieux weighs in at The Week, writing that, although “Supreme Court voting is too complex to be explained by any single factor,” the “attitudinal model” – which posits that “Supreme Court votes are explained by what judges consider desirable policy” – “still contains a good deal of truth.” — Amy […]

In an era in which corporations have been trying every possible stratagem to cut employee benefits (see our look at the Obamacare employer mandate earlier today), a new threat to retirement benefits has just arisen. The source of the threat is the Supreme Court, which earlier this month agreed to rule on when or whether employers can […]

The Supreme Court has long been criticized for its unwillingness to televise, or even record, its proceedings. But debate about transparency at the nation’s highest court should extend far beyond the issue of television cameras. Citizens deserve transparency from the court about how it decides which cases to hear, how justices decide whether to recuse […]