Cato Supreme Court Review: 2006–2007

About the Book

Now in its sixth year, this acclaimed annual publication, published every September, brings together leading national scholars to analyze the Supreme Court’s most important decisions from the term just ended and preview the year ahead. Although directed to legal experts, its articles are fully accessible to non‐​attorneys interested in the work of the Court.Crucial to its exceptional coverage, the Review takes a Madisonian perspective–grounded in the nation’s first principles, liberty and limited government.

Cases critiqued in the 2006–2007 edition include major Court decisions pertaining to First Amendment challenges, protections for corporations targeted by punitive damage awards, the constitutionality of the federal partial birth abortion ban, global warming, and public school education.

About the Editor

Mark K. Moller is a former senior fellow in constitutional studies. Currently he is an assistant professor of law at DePaul University College of Law. 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.

Praise for the Review

“Cato, with its emphasis on limited government and individual rights, has weighed in with a book of essays by academics and practicing lawyers that manages to skewer liberal and conservative justices alike.”
—Tony Mauro, Supreme Court Correspondent, Legal Times

“In view of so many Americans’ alarming lack of knowledge of why we are Americans, the Cato Supreme Court Review is essential reading.”
—Nat Hentoff, Syndicated Columnist, Village Voice