Annus Vacuus

The Supreme Court term ended today. In terms of cases relevant to Opinio Juris readers, there was only one blockbuster case, Massachusetts v. EPA. We profited from various posts about that case already, including contributions from Hari Osofsky, Dan Bodansky, and John Knox.

But beyond that one case, in my opinion there was nothing of significance this term relevant to our discipline. There were a few minor cases involving arcane questions of statutory interpretation (India v. New York discussed here, Powerex v. Reliant discussed here, Lopez v. Gonzalez discussed here, Sinochem v. Malaysia International discussed here). But none of these cases will be remembered even a year from now.

With respect to constitutional comparativism, the silence was deafening. I am not aware of a single Supreme Court case this year that relied on contemporary foreign or international law and practice to interpret constitutional provisions. This is despite the obvious opportunities (and in one case an explicit invitation) to do so in the contexts of abortion (Carhart), free speech (Morse), due process (Philip Morris) and equal protection (today’s opinion in Parents Involved in Community Schools). I personally welcome that silence, with the minor quibble that it appears to confirm suspicions that comparativists on the Court use such material only when it suits their outcome preferences.

In short, this year is not a year on which we shall look back with great importance. In terms of international law, it has turned out to be an Annus Vacuus, an empty year.