Bush v. the Supreme Court -- Game, Set and Match to the President
Most people concerned to any serious degree with individual rights appear to think that the three Supreme Court anti-terrorism decisions announced this week represent a significant victory on behalf of civil liberties, and that they rein in the government in important ways.
Now that I've read most of the three opinions, as well as much commentary about them, I think that view is wrong.
I explain my reasons in some detail, here.
comments powered by Disqus
- Jewish history is under siege in the middle east and these volunteers are risking their lives to protect it
- 'Amazon should stop selling Holocaust denial books'
- National Museum of African American History and Culture Reaches Milestone of 1 Million Visitors
- What Makes a President Great? Clipping? Sipping? Slashing?
- Carla Hayden says Frederick Douglass "might have a lot to do with the fact that I am a librarian”
- Historian and Antiwar Activist Marilyn Young Dies at 79
- Trump Chooses Historian H.R. McMaster as National Security Adviser
- Holocaust Historian Deborah Lipstadt Explains Why People Believe Trump's Lies
- Princeton’s Harold James warns World War Three is now a "serious threat”
- Israeli schools' history lessons create good soldiers, says pundit