Cato Supreme Court Review: 2005–2006
About the Book
In this annual review from the Cato Institute, Mark K. Moller and leading legal scholars analyze the 2005–2006 Supreme Court term, specifically the most important and far‐reaching cases of the year, plus cases coming up. Now in its fifth edition, the Review is the first scholarly journal to appear after the term’s end and the only one grounded in the nation’s first principles, liberty, and limited government.
About the Editor
Mark K. Moller is a senior fellow in constitutional studies. An experienced appellate lawyer, Moller previously practiced law with the Appellate and Constitutional Law Practice Group at the law firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP. During private practice, he engaged in a number of high‐profile representations, including as a member of the team that successfully litigated Bush v. Gore before the Supreme Court and as an advisor to judicial nominee Miguel A. Estrada during his Senate confirmation hearings.
Topics & Contributors
SEPARATION OF POWERS IN WARTIME – Hamdan v. Rumsfeld – Opposing articles clash over the Court’s ruling on military commissions set up by President Bush to try enemy combatants.
By Martin S. Flaherty and John Yoo
FEDERALISM – Gonzales v. Oregon and Rapanos v. United States – What cases about assisted suicide and wetlands reveal about the future of constitutional limits on federal power.
By Ilya Somin
DEATH PENALTY SENTENCING – Hill v. McDonough – An examination of the effect of this case on capital punishment by lethal injection.
By Douglas Berman
MILITARY RECRUITING ON CAMPUS – Rumsfeld v. FAIR – Why the Court was “unanimously wrong,” in the ruling, which upheld the government’s right to cut off funding to law schools that bar military recruiters.
By Dale Carpenter
THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE – Hudson v. Michigan – Does this ruling spell the end of the Fourth Amendment’s exclusionary rule?
By David Moran
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY – Gonzales v. O Centro Beneficiente Uniao do Vegetal – What a case involving a DEA investigation of a religious group that uses a hallucinogenic drug means for religious freedom.
By Richard W. Garnett
CAMPAIGN FINANCE REGULATION – Wisconsin Right to Life Foundation v. FEC and Randall v. Sorrell – What the Court’s decisions say about the future of campaign finance regulation.
By Allison Hayward
STATE TAX INCENTIVES – Daimler Chrysler Corp. v. Cuno – How the Court can make sense of constitutional challenges to corporate tax incentives.
By Brannon Denning
SECURITIES FRAUD – Merrill Lynch v. Dabit – Why the Court would have been smart to give states more power over securities fraud class actions.
By Larry Ribstein
ANTITRUST REGULATION – Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc. – What this case reveals about the economics of price discrimination.
By Joshua Wright
SPECIAL FEATURES INCLUDE
FREEDOM OF RELIGION – Nadine Strossen, president of the American Civil Liberties Union, outlines her libertarian view of the First Amendment’s Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses.
LOOKING AHEAD – Peter B. Rutledge, former clerk to Justice Thomas, tells us what last term’s voting trends reveal about Chief Justice Roberts, Samuel Alito, and the coming Supreme Court term.