Paul: regarding the “bitterly divided” Supreme Court, the following decisions were so described by various media. There’s a definite pattern:
Juries, not judges, can increase sentences beyond the suggested maximums (WashPo)
The Missouri Compromise was ruled unconstitutional, “precipitating the Civil War” (New Republic)
?“state governments are immune from individual lawsuits for violations of federal laws” (World Socialist Website)
Manual recounts in Florida’s 2000 presidential balloting were unconstitutional, “the end of the road” for Gore’s candidacy (Salon)
School vouchers can be used for private and religious schools, too (Kinderstart.com)
Upholding anti-sodomy laws in Georgia(from a blog whose parent site I don’t think I’ll visit)
Upholding school policies mandating random drug testing for student athletes
And just to show it’s not all leftward leaning writers, here’s one from National Review about a ruling in which “A bitterly divided court came within one vote of making language choice a protected civil right” but didn’t.
Well! At least NR had access to the Official Style Manual!
