Judge Schwab's legal analysis is thin. He spends nearly as much time making what appear to be political attacks on the president as he does evaluating actual legal matters. And what little legal analysis he does provide fails to cite key Supreme Court decisions that seem to contradict his conclusion.
The contest seeks to show that, if enticed by a cash prize, a community of scholars can discover something that the justices themselves cannot find -- or at least that they claim not to have found -- a way to prevent lawmakers from choosing their own voters.
Last week, Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe sent out a broadside he wrote with the world's largest privately-held coal company attacking the Environmental Protection Agency's proposed rule to regulate carbon pollution from existing power plants under the Clean Air Act.