Scrivener’s Error has an excellent and accurate analysis of the Supreme Court’s decision Thursday in the case involving the energy task force chaired by Cheney. Simply summarized, it was a case where “important constitutional questions . . . will go unanswered because the trial attorneys made three pretty basic errors in procedures.” (Via Discourse.net).
Nonlawyers need to be aware that a fundamental rule of jurisprudence is that courts will avoid constitutional issues when their resolution is not necessary to dispose of a case. That is why the constitutional issues were not addressed here or in the pledge case (about which more in a later post). Since nonsubstantive issues led to avoidance of the constitutional issues in both cases, you have to wonder about the legal abilities of the individuals involved in the lawsuits.
