SCOTUS Report

There have been a series of 5-4 rulings with Sam Alito in the majority, many of which fundamentally change bedrock Constitutional principles like the preponderance of evidence standard for deciding death-penalty cases, and the "knock and announce" rule, which Publius considers rightly decided, though others disagree, seeing some hypocrisy in the process:

By the by, (Antonin) Scalia, writing for the majority, is happy to set his originalism aside and argue that the growth of “public-interest law firms and lawyers who specialize in civil-rights grievances … [and] the increasing professionalism of police forces, including a new emphasis on internal police discipline … [and] the increasing use of various forms of citizen review can enhance police accountability” all mean that the fourth amendment can be reinterpreted.

I've always thought that originalism was more a PR strategy than a guiding ideology.

But the point is that Samuel Alito has indeed moved the court to the right in ways that are fundamentally changing the meaning of the Constitution, notwithstanding today's ruling on Vermont's campaign-finance laws, which has such little consensus that there were 6 opinions for 9 Justices.

I bring this up because a very important case is headed to the Court, one who's impacts could be vital to the future of the planet:

The Supreme Court agreed Monday to consider whether the Bush administration must regulate carbon dioxide to combat global warming, setting up what could be one of the court's most important decisions on the environment.

The decision means the court will address whether the administration's decision to rely on voluntary measures to combat climate change are legal under federal clean air laws.

''This is the whole ball of wax. This will determine whether the Environmental Protection Agency is to regulate greenhouse gases from cars and whether EPA can regulate carbon dioxide from power plants,'' said David Bookbinder, an attorney for the Sierra Club.

I don't know that you get bigger than a case like this. And with Roberts and Alito firmly ensconced on the bench, the odds are not in favor of regulation. I fully understand that elections have consequences, but if the Court rules that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant and cannot be regulated, it would be almost impossible to unentangle. And the Earth might not be able to wait for such a disentanglement.