Due to store maintenance, orders placed between July 23rd and July 25th will experience a short delay in shipping. Thank you for your patience.

Cato Supreme Court Review: 2006-2007 (Paperback)


Edited by Mark K. Moller

Also available in these formats Price
eBook $2.99
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. The Cato Supreme Court Review is unlike any other publication that follows the work of the Court:

• It is timely. An in-depth review, it appears less than three months after the Court’s term ends and before the new term begins.
• Although directed to legal experts, its articles are fully accessible to nonattorneys 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.

“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
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.
Number of Pages: 


Wilkie v. Robbins
How the Court dealt a “severe and unjustifiable blow to individual rights,” leaving the Bivens doctrine “on life support with little chance of recovery.”
By Laurence H. Tribe

FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc.
How a new majority on the Court has put a brake on campaign finance “reform,” “revived Buckley and thus breathed life into the First Amendment.”
By Lillian R. BeVier

Washington v. WEA & Davenport v. WEA
In what should have been an easy First Amendment case, the Court ended up harming speech rights by arriving at the right conclusion for the wrong reasons.
By Erik S. Jaffe

Morse v. Frederick
Concluding that despite the Court’s “zeal to give the government a win in the War on Drugs,” the decision “has two bright spots for free speech advocates.”
By Hans Bader

Gonzales v. Cahart
Writing “the majority opinion that might have been” had the parties objected to the federal partial birth abortion ban as exceeding Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause.
By Brannon P. Denning

Massachusetts v. EPA
Arguing that while the states won, standing doctrine lost, accelerating the “trend toward regulation through litigation.”
By Andrew P. Morriss

Hein v. Freedom from
Religion Foundation

Why the Court has created a road map “by which the Executive may circumnavigate judicial standing in Establishment Clause cases altogether, simply by supporting religious institutions on its own initiative.”
By Robert Corn-Revere

Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1
Why the Court’s equal protection methodology has proven “deeply unsatisfying” and its future jurisprudence in this area will be “difficult to predict.”
By Samuel Estreicher

Watters v. Wachovia Bank
Arguing that “the interests of freedom are advanced by federal control of banking regulation.”
By G. Marcus Cole

Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc. & Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Ross-Simmons Hardwood
Lumber Co.

Why despite the notoriety of the Leegin decision, which overruled the “much maligned” Dr. Miles case, the Court’s less noticed ruling in Weyerhaeuser Co. may prove to be more important in the long run.
By Thomas A. Lambert

Philip Morris v. Williams
How the Court missed a chance to clarify the due process constraints on excessive punitive damages, proving once again that the Court has “no coherent view of punitive damages.”
By Michael I. Krauss


Danny J. Boggs, chief judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, examines the Supreme Court’s existing record from a consideration for “rule of law” values.

Glenn Harlan Reynolds, Beauchamp Brogan Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Tennessee, examines the trends in the Court’s caseload, surveys the Supreme Court term to come, and makes some predictions about the hotly watched cases likely to be reviewed.