It would seem that the "horseshoe theory" also applies to the 5th Circuit's decision in the mifepristone case. It's probably even more applicable to Judge Kacsmaryk's decision In that, and in other cases). And Judge Reinhard's observation/hope that "they can't catch them all" certainly applies as well.
Fascinating analysis. I know that I concluded at about age 13 that Stalinists and Nazis basically met and shook hands on the far side of a circle. Horseshoe does just fine for that.
I can't be said to be a fan at all of Scalia, but the phrase Rule of Law is a Law of Rules is perfect. We are seeing the standing rule go down in flames. Pretty soon a view-minded neighbor 3 houses down will be able to sue you to remove a tree because some time it might fall on the middle neighbor's fence.
I was sadly not surprised when I saw that Judge Ho was part of this legal enigma. As I recall, he also participated in the fifth circuit's asinine take in the Mifepristone case, disregarding the abundance of standing and merits issues that Adam copiously dissected previously.
I believe Judge Ho wrote in concurrence on that case to also describe some vague "aesthetic pleasure" from childbirth and arguing that that somehow gave life to the plaintiff's (nonsensical, in my view) claims. Perhaps that relates to Adam's talk here for a "lion-esque" judge substituting personal justice for established law.
Great article. This principle highlights my objection to Chief Justice Roberts line of questioning about fairness in the college loan forgiveness cases. The Supreme Court wasn't tasked with evaluating the fairness of the statute; only whether allowing the Education secretary to modify or eliminate loan payments allowed them to cancel the payments. The Chief was, sadly, roaring and tossing his name.
It would seem that the "horseshoe theory" also applies to the 5th Circuit's decision in the mifepristone case. It's probably even more applicable to Judge Kacsmaryk's decision In that, and in other cases). And Judge Reinhard's observation/hope that "they can't catch them all" certainly applies as well.
Kacsmaryk definitely seems like a "lion."
Supremely good article. The lions seem to want a government of men.
Fascinating analysis. I know that I concluded at about age 13 that Stalinists and Nazis basically met and shook hands on the far side of a circle. Horseshoe does just fine for that.
I can't be said to be a fan at all of Scalia, but the phrase Rule of Law is a Law of Rules is perfect. We are seeing the standing rule go down in flames. Pretty soon a view-minded neighbor 3 houses down will be able to sue you to remove a tree because some time it might fall on the middle neighbor's fence.
I was sadly not surprised when I saw that Judge Ho was part of this legal enigma. As I recall, he also participated in the fifth circuit's asinine take in the Mifepristone case, disregarding the abundance of standing and merits issues that Adam copiously dissected previously.
I believe Judge Ho wrote in concurrence on that case to also describe some vague "aesthetic pleasure" from childbirth and arguing that that somehow gave life to the plaintiff's (nonsensical, in my view) claims. Perhaps that relates to Adam's talk here for a "lion-esque" judge substituting personal justice for established law.
Judge (sic) Ho took the oath from Justice (sic) Thomas in the private library of one Harlan Crow.
Great article. This principle highlights my objection to Chief Justice Roberts line of questioning about fairness in the college loan forgiveness cases. The Supreme Court wasn't tasked with evaluating the fairness of the statute; only whether allowing the Education secretary to modify or eliminate loan payments allowed them to cancel the payments. The Chief was, sadly, roaring and tossing his name.