Day By Day, Case By Case, The

Many Think It Not Only Inevitable But Entirely Proper That Liberty Give Way To Security In Times Of National Crisis--that, At The Extremes Of Military Exigency, Inter Arma Silent Leges. Whatever The General Merits Of The View That War Silences Law Or Modulates Its Voice, That View Has No Place In The Interpretation And Application Of A Constitution Designed Precisely To Confront War And, In A Manner That Accords With Democratic Principles, To Accommodate It.

Rather Than Rewriting The Law Under The Pretense Of Interpreting It, The Court Should Have Left It To Congress To Decide What To Do About The Act's Limitation Of Tax Credits To State Exchanges.

With Respect To Public Acknowledgment Of Religious Belief, It Is Entirely Clear From Our Nation's Historical Practices That The Establishment Clause Permits This Disregard Of Polytheists And Believers In Unconcerned Deities, Just As It Permits The Disregard Of Devout Atheists.

To Allow The Policy Question Of Same-sex Marriage To Be Considered And Resolved By A Select, Patrician, Highly Unrepresentative Panel Of Nine Is To Violate A Principle Even More Fundamental Than No Taxation Without Representation: No Social Transformation Without Representation.

I Think The Main Fight Is To Dissuade Americans From What The Secularists Are Trying To Persuade Them To Be True: That The Separation Of Church And State Means That The Government Cannot Favor Religion Over Nonreligion.