The New York Times News

The Delusion of Good Faith Judging

By Mark Pulliam | Jun 2, 2018

The concept of written legal rules—of the law itself—assumes that their content is fixed and ascertainable. The rule of law likewise depends on citizens having advance notice of what they can and cannot do, pursuant to clear, knowable directives. Legal scholars expend enormous energy pontificating about the appropriate techniques judges should apply in the course of constitutional interpretation: textualism, originalism, and so forth. Libertarian theorists argue strenuously that judges must be given greater authority—through “judicial engagement”—over the political branches. Each day, lawyers across the country trot off to court, briefs in hand, hoping to convince a black-robed judge–enthroned behind a raised, magisterial bench—that the relevant legal rules, properly construed, compel a ruling in favor of their client.

Has Gorsuch ‘Gone Wobbly’ Already?

By Mark Pulliam | Apr 25, 2018

A Supreme Court decision on immigration that was not expected to be controversial instead attracted wide attention upon its release last week. The reason: Justice Neil Gorsuch, the much-heralded successor to the legendary Antonin Scalia, joined with the High Court’s four liberals to overturn an immigration statute on the grounds that it was “void for vagueness,” over the strenuous dissent of the court’s conservative bloc: Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Anthony Kennedy, and Chief Justice John Roberts.

Prosecutorial Collusion in the Fourth Estate: Anatomy of a Witch Hunt, Part 4

By Mark Pulliam | Jan 23, 2018

Mark Pulliam analyzes the baseless and politically-motivated prosecution of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, exploring the disturbing collusion between the news media and the special prosecutors.

Selective Outrage

By Mark Pulliam | Jul 7, 2017

Is Sen. Kamala Harris the victim of partisan politics, or its savvy practitioner and beneficiary?

Robert Scott named Technology Lawyer of the Year

By Chandra Lye | Jan 2, 2017

SOUTHLAKE – Lawyer Monthly has named the managing partner of law firm Scott & Scott LLP the Technology Lawyer of the Year.

Don't Thread on Me

By Mark Pulliam | Sep 28, 2016

The Texas Supreme Court’s 2015 decision in Patel v. Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation, striking down a state law requiring at least 750 hours of training in order to perform commercial “eyebrow threading”—a form of hair removal mainly performed in South Asian and Middle Eastern communities—has generated substantial notoriety for the court and for the Institute for Justice, which brought the lawsuit challenging the law.

The Record Network