Supreme Court roundup

Mostly Cato links:


  • Apparently George Will does not agree with the art community and their supporters – that art in its various expressed forms has no bounds.

    • a “boundless” art is hard to draw lines around, and this case is all about arbitrary line drawing. I suspect the court will rule in a fractured way, but ultimately conclude that baking a cake isn’t protected, nor is “generic” run of the mill decoration (pick from our catalog of options…), but that custom writing, decorations (the groom and groom or bride and bride silhouettes, etc) etc will be protected, much like with the screen printers. The court will no doubt assure us that they have pronounced a workable standard, and the lesser courts will no doubt each interpret that standard diffferently, while individual judges largely rule in accordance with their (dis)agreement as to the message conveyed.

      But then, I may be a cynic.

      • “But then, I may be a cynic.”

        Justifiably, in my opinion, in this case.

  • The headline for Silvester v. Becerra: “Ninth Circuit errs on individual gun rights, SCOTUS should correct” Heck, if you took that quote and removed ‘individual gun rights’, you’d be right on nearly every case the Ninth Circuit decides. Just save it as a fill-in-the-blank: “Ninth Circuit errors on _________________, SCOTUS should correct.”