In an 8-1 decision, the Supreme Court today decided that a federal law against so-called “crush videos” – whose depravity will go unilluminated here – were too broadly written to survive constitutional scrutiny under the First Amendment guarantees. Writing an opinion in favor of the law was the heavily favored SCOTUS prospective Elena Kagan, late of Harvard, enemy to military recruitment.
Her contribution was contrary to her interests:
The court’s decision not only stuck down a law enacted by Congress, but it also delivered a rather pointed rebuke to two individuals. First, Solicitor General Elena Kagan, a top contender for the U.S. Supreme Court, whose brief on behalf of the Obama administration was thoroughly repudiated in the strongest terms.
Gene Schaerr, who filed a brief on the other side for the libertarian Cato Institute, said if Kagan supervised the writing of the brief she signed, “I would agree that it does seem to raise questions about her judgment.”
Ah, well. It’s all about timing, isn’t it?
A good soldier does what s/he is told. But a really good soldier does it well.