Mona Charen

The four dissenters in Obergefell v. Hodges lucidly expressed the profound offense against constitutional law and representative democracy the ruling represents. In short, five lawyers, accountable to no one, chose to legislate on a profoundly consequential matter that the people were just beginning to address through democratic means. As Chief Justice Roberts wrote: "Who do we think we are?" If justices cannot resist the urge to legislate, let's drop the pretense that constitutional law is guided by neutral principles and at least give the people the option to vote justices in (and out).

Daniel Davis

Uber may not be a service that suits everyone -- as a woman riding solo, I'm not willing to chance it -- but it has nonetheless exposed impediments to a free market in the French taxi industry.

Paul Greenberg

The hopes and fears of all the years met last week in Obergefell v. Hodges, the narrow but sweeping decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that proclaims homosexual couples have a right to marry anywhere in the country. Congratulations to them. At first glance, they've scored a significant victory, even if the score was just 5 to 4.

Neil McCabe

The other meta-bill that defines the legacy of President Barack Obama besides the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act that created that unchained monster called the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Mon. Jun 29
Sun. Jun 28
Sat. Jun 27
Fri. Jun 26
Thu. Jun 25
Wed. Jun 24
Tue. Jun 23