Tennessee Law Professor Benjamin Barton recently published a study examining the professional experience of every Supreme Court justice in American history. His study shows that the current justices’ resumes are quite different than those of past justices — “Roberts Court Justices have spent more pre-appointment time in legal academia, appellate judging, and living in Washington, D.C. than any previous Supreme Court.” The most striking thing of all about Barton’s study, however, is this chart:

Significantly, the Supreme Court handed down its election-buying decision in Citizens United v. FEC just a few short years after the last elected official to serve on the Court retired. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, a former Arizona state senator and the last justice to have personal experience with how money can corrupt the political process, supported campaign finance regulation.

Over and over, the damage from HB 56, Alabama’s extreme immigration law, has been documented. But the clear warning signs against the policy that targets undocumented immigrants have not stopped Mississippip lawamkers from supporting a proposed bill that would implement a harmful immigration law modeled after Alabama’s unconstitutional law. Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant (R) publicly threw his support behind the measure on Wednesday:

Governor Phil Bryant believes not enough has been done locally or nationally to deal with what he calls a “massive, uncontrolled” immigration policy.

“Perhaps it’s boat-rocking time in Mississippi,” Gov. Bryant said Wednesday at the State Capitol, surrounded by other supporters of House Bill 488. [...]

“There is a way to get a temporary worker here in the U.S. The people we’re talking about don’t want to go through that process,” Gov. Bryant said.

One House committee has already approved the measure. Rep. Becky Currie (R), the bill’s sponsor, has brushed off concerns about the measure. “This is just a way of saying you’re welcome to live in our country; you’re welcome to work in our country, but be legal,” she said. “That’s all we’re asking. Be legal.”

But Currie’s legislation mirrors Alabama’s law in that it seeks to create an enviroment so hostile to undocumented immigrants that they flee the state. In Alabama, the result of that exodus could cost the state billions in GDP losses and thousands of lost jobs. With similar effects likely in Mississippi, Bill Chandler, executive director of the Mississippi Immigrants Rights Alliance, said it would hurt the state far more than it would help. He asked, “Can Mississippi afford such a law?”

Our Guest Blogger is Reid Setzer, an Intern at the Center for American Progress Action Fund and a student at Georgetown Law

Earlier today, Georgetown University President John J. DeGioia issued a letter to members of the Georgetown community supporting Georgetown University Law Student Sandra Fluke and criticizing those who responded to her testimony by labeling her a “slut” or a “prostitute”:

In recent days, a law student of Georgetown, Sandra Fluke, offered her testimony regarding the proposed regulations by the Department of Health and Human Services before a group of members of Congress. She was respectful, sincere, and spoke with conviction. She provided a model of civil discourse. This expression of conscience was in the tradition of the deepest values we share as a people. One need not agree with her substantive position to support her right to respectful free expression. And yet, some of those who disagreed with her position – including Rush Limbaugh and commentators throughout the blogosphere and in various other media channels – responded with behavior that can only be described as misogynistic, vitriolic, and a misrepresentation of the position of our student.

The Dean of Georgetown Law School, William M. Treanor, also issued a letter to the Law Center community in support of Ms. Fluke, labeling the vile statements made about her as “the basest sort of name-calling and vilification, words that aim only to belittle and intimidate.” The letter was signed by the majority of the faculty of the Law Center, as well as Father Alexei Michalenko of the Law Center Campus Ministry.

DeGioia, Treanor and their colleagues all deserve credit for standing by Fluke. Yet they are hardly going out on a limb by saying it is unacceptable to compare a woman seeking contraceptive treatment to a prostitute. Presently, Georgetown’s health plans provide contraceptive coverage for faculty members and staff, but they deny the very same coverage to most students. In the wake of these comments, DeGioia and the leadership should take the logical next step of ensuring that she enjoys the very same coverage as her professors.

At a time when the national political debate is dominated by questions of religious freedoms, dueling headlines on the Miami Herald’s website underscore how self-described defenders of faith are often only interested in promoting freedom for some and not for all

Yesterday, within the span of 24 hours, the Florida House passed a bill to allow prayer in public schools and another to crack down on the supposed threat of Sharia law.

In a lopsided 88-27 vote, the chamber okayed a bill to allow any student to deliver “inspirational messages,” including religious prayers, at public-school events. “Look at what just happened in Ohio,” one lawmaker said, referencing the recent school school shooting there. “The kids need to have prayer at school.” Another explained the need by citing the “sex, gambling and all of the moral decay that’s on our televisions and radios.”

The ACLU and Anti-Defamation League believe the bill violates the separation of Church and State and have threatened legal action. Meanwhile, the other bill bans the use of “foreign law,” with an implicit focus on the supposed dangers of Sharia. When asked, the bill’s sponsor couldn’t point to a single cases in Florida in which a judge ruled on Sharia, but said the state needs to “jump in front of the problem.”

Civil libertarians and Jewish lawmakers are also outraged by the measure, as it may “void divorces mediated through Jewish tribunals.” The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) in Florida is fighting back. “The alleged threat of Islamic or other religious or foreign law to Florida’s court system is completely illusory, and the Senate’s consideration of this measure is an unwise use of resources,” said ADL’s Andrew Rosenkranz.

Carin Marie Porr, of the Florida Bar Association, pointed out that Florida law “already refuse to support the laws of another state or country that contradicts our public policy,” saying the anti-Sharia bill “clearly goes against the fundamental rights of the people of Florida.”

While neither bill explicitly targets any religion, the school prayer bill was pushed by evangelical Christians and will likely be used by them most, while the anti-Sharia law clearly targets Muslims and may be based on xenophobia.

In the wake of the revelation that he sent a racist email suggesting that President Obama’s mother had sex with a dog, Montana federal judge Richard Cebull wrote a letter of apology to the president:

I sincerely and profusely apologize to you and your family for the email I forwarded. I accept full responsibility; I have no one to blame but myself.

I can assure you that such action on my part will never happen again. I have requested that the Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit review this matter.

Honestly, I don’t know what else I can do. Please forgive me and, again, my most sincere apology.

Cebull deserves credit for handling the aftermath of this incident like an adult, and there is no reason to doubt that he is genuinely contrite. Nevertheless, no amount of mere remorse can erase the stain his actions have placed on the federal judiciary.

No matter how apologetic Cebull may feel, the fact remains that his job is to exercise judgment, and he showed abysmally poor judgment by sending this email in the first place. As the commentary to the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges instructs “[a] judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny and accept freely and willingly restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen”

Worse, the fact remains that Cebull didn’t just show terrible judgment, he showed terrible judgment by endorsing a joke that any reasonable person would have viewed as offensive and unacceptable. Cebull’s email suggested that having sex with a black man is akin to having sex with a dog. The fact that he was not immediately disturbed by this email raises very real questions about whether he can impartially apply the law in race discrimination cases.

As Rep. Charlie Gonzalez (D-TX) explained yesterday, “it would appropriate for Chief Judge Cebull to ponder whether his continued service as a federal judge has been irreparably compromised and that another career may be more appropriate for someone with his views and temperament.”