Below is my column in the Hill newspaper on the recent allegation of sexual assault against Judge Brett Kavanaugh and the demand for a delay in his confirmation vote. Both Kavanaugh and the other man referenced in the anonymous letter have denied the allegations from their high school days. The reported law professor who contacted Congress appears to want the allegation considered by members but has refused to come forward and said that she did not want to be drawn into the controversy. If that was her position, Democrats have now done the opposite and leaked the letter’s details and called for a full investigation. If this is a law professor, it is unclear why she is not willing to come forward with an allegation of a sexual assault. She clearly thought that the allegation should be raised with Congress but has refused to come forward to substantiate the claims. That leaves Kavanaugh in a grossly unfair position in my view. UPDATE: Kavanaugh’s accuser has now gone public.
Here is the column:
I have previously written about the continued use of blasphemy laws in the West, including Spain and Ireland. The continued enforcement of medieval concepts of blasphemy as evidenced by the detention of Willy Toledo, who was accused of ridiculing God and the Virgin Mary in court. Toledo is being targeted due to comments made on social media in support of three women who are being prosecuted for blasphemy. It is chilling to think that an actual judge would hold such a hearing in modern times. The nation that gave us the Spanish Inquisition still claims the right to imprison people for insulting God.
Hillary Clinton surprisingly tweeted a clearly false allegation against Judge Brett Kavanaugh on Wednesday that had already been widely disproven. Clinton told followers that Kavanaugh referred to birth control pills as “abortion-inducing drugs.” He didn’t but that does not appear to matter to many spreading this false story, including Clinton. Clinton said that she wanted to be
Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on the rising pressure on Sen. Susan Collins over her vote on Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. There is considerable anger over Collins maintaining that she would never vote for a nominee hostile to Roe v. Wade but refusing to acknowledge the widespread view of Kavanaugh as not only hostile to the reasoning of Roe but appointed by a president who promised only to nominate an anti-Roe justice. As with Neil Gorsuch, Collins appears inclined to vote for Kavanaugh despite her oft-repeated pledge. She insists that she is comfortable after Kavanaugh told her that Roe is “settled” law. However, many have put Collins’ position as falling somewhere between hopeful thinking and willful blindness. As discussed below, the unsettling thing about settled law is that only five votes make anything truly settled on the Court.
I will have the pleasure of participating in the annual Supreme Court review today previewing the upcoming October term. The other panelists will be former Solicitor General Gregory Garre, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund President and Director-Counsel Sherrilyn Ifill. Associate Dean (and Supreme Court litigator) Alan Morrison will moderate the panel.
We have previously discussed the alarming rollback on 
We
The opening day has finally arrived for many of us who are football fans. However, if there was hope to have a season without the highly divisive anthem controversy, those hopes were dashed as the
Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on the Kavanaugh confirmation hearing and the opening statement of Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse attacking the conservatives on the Supreme Court as a virtual ideological cabal. I have always found Whitehouse an articulate and insightful member of the Congress. He was not alone in these attacks. However, I found the attack on the current justices to be unwarranted and distorted. There is a tendency when you disagree with a decision like Hobby Lobby to conclude that the motivations of the justices must therefore be raw politics. The possibility that the justices, including Justice Kennedy, are following a coherent jurisprudential view is dismissed in favor of partisanship.
In an 
Former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore has long been an perpetual litigation machine. Indeed, Moore and his wife appear to have created a cottage industry out of being themselves — getting people to give them huge amounts of money to fight their enemies.
I have previously objected to the art field being subjected to quota systems from
Below is my column in The Hill on the continuing promotionals for “The Notorious RBG.” I have long been a critic of this trend toward celebrity justices and the discomfort over these campaigns is not simply about Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The culture of the Court is changing and I do not believe it is changing for the better.
We