Contributor, The Volokh Conspiracy

(Here is the latest edition of the Institute for Justice’s weekly Short Circuit newsletter, written by John Ross.)

Griswold v. Connecticut is one of the Supreme Court’s most consequential and controversial decisions, and is associated with a doctrine that conservatives love to hate: “substantive due process.” Evan Bernick of the Center for Judicial Engagement explains why the Court arrived at the right result for the wrong reasons, and why the decision matters today. Click here to read.

New on the podcast: a suspiciously relaxed motorist, prairie dogs, illegal tattooing, and more. Click here for iTunes.

Until this month, the Alabama Ethics Commission required many people who wanted to speak to state officials about legislation to travel to Montgomery for a one-hour, in-person ethics class (held only four times per year). For Maggie Ellinger-Locke, who works in D.C. as legislative counsel to the Marijuana Policy Project, that meant an 800-mile round-trip flight just so she could talk to Alabama legislators on the phone for a few hours each year. An unconstitutional infringement on her right to petition? Maggie and MPP thought so, so they teamed up with IJ to challenge the rule. Last week, the commission agreed to offer the training online. Click here to read more. (The recently resigned Gov. Robert Bentley took a similar course, so there is some question about the effectiveness of the approach.)