The case that Patterico discusses, Dalton v. Specter, has some intriguing immplications as to the limitations that Congress can put on judicial review. Specter and his allies were protesting the closing of the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard under the Defense Base Closure and Reaslignment Act. They said that the Philadelphia yards hadn't gotten fair consideration. At question was whether the restriction that Congress had put in the law forbidding judicial review of the decisions of the Commission violated almost 200 years of tradition since Marbury v. Madison. Alito, on the Circuit Court had dissented from the majority and said that Congress had the right to so act. Specter appealed to the Supreme Court and argued the case himself. The Court went against him unanimously. I like this paragraph from the ruling.
Contrary to respondents' contention, failure to allow judicial review here does not result in the virtual repudiation of Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, and nearly two centuries of constitutional adjudication. The judicial power conferred by Article III is upheld just as surely by withholding judicial relief where Congress has permissibly foreclosed it as it is by granting such relief where authorized by the Constitution or by statuteThwack!
Patterico wonders if leftover animus from this case might predispose Specter against Alito. However, Specter, more recently has praised Alito. Who knows what Specter really thinks? Who cares? I think Specter might rough him up a bit in the hearings and talk about super-duper precedents and all that guff but, in the end, I expect he would vote for Alito just as he did for Roberts. But he'll play to the limelight as much as possible until that moment.
0 comments:
Post a Comment