Like Souter himself, the car remains a mystery. Justice Souter is famous for pulling an Earl Warren and surprising the president that appointed him (George Bush, Sr.) by moving further and further away from the conservative views he was supposed to represent. Surprise us by identifying the car in the photo.Hat tip to Maxichamp!

Photo Credit: Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Oh, Hoons of the dark side, the day you've feared is nigh! In a decision that really shocks no one, the Supreme Court overwhelmingly sided with the police who "do not have to call off pursuit of a fleeing motorist when they reasonably expect that other people could be hurt." So says Anton Scalia. And seven other top Justices agree with him. John Paul Stevens is the sole dissenter. We say shocks no one because we remember watching our fist LA Freeway chase live on the TV and at the end, the cops shot and killed the guy. In this case, Atlanta sheriff's deputy Timothy Scott rammed Victor Harris's Cadillac off the road and into a ditch. Harris, paralyzed, sued Scott for violating his Fourth Amendment rights. Concludes Scalia, "A police officer's attempt to terminate a dangerous high-speed car chase that threatens the lives of innocent bystanders does not violate the Fourth Amendment, even when it places the fleeing motorist at risk of serious injury or death." Our take?

Running from the cops, while righteous on film, is the new suicide. Interesting side note: The video above is taken from the Supreme Court's own website. As far as we can tell, it is the first video they have ever posted. It truly is a brave new world. – Jonny Lieberman

Supreme Court sides with police in chase case [msnbc.com]

Related:
Meshugana of the Day: Cop Tickets Himself | It's the Way of the New World! 'Cobra' Car Chase [Internal]

Wert was totally adorable last night while busting out some hard core facial expressions "On The Money" last night on CNBC. We've got the video above, so take a look and answer for us the golden question of the only Official Car Pundit Drinking Game — how many drinks was that?

On The Money [CNBC]

Related:
Official Car Pundit Drinking Game: New York Auto Show Edition [internal]

On The Money [CNBC.com]

Related:
All of our Official Car Pundit Drinking Game coverage [internal]

"The court had three questions before it. Do states have the right to sue the EPA to challenge its decision? Does the Clean Air Act give EPA the authority to regulate tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases? Does EPA have the discretion not to regulate those emissions?"

1.) Yes.
2.) Yes.
3.) Try again later.

...ordered the EPA to re-evaluate whether it has the discretion not to regulate tailpipe emissions despite the Clean Air Act's requirements that they do so. As to what this means — it probably means it'll force the EPA to finally start regulating what comes out of the ass-end of vehicles, and that means lots of R&D dollars will need to be spent on fuel economy and on emissions reduction. Anyone got another idea like the catalytic converter hanging around the shop? – Ray Wert

Supreme Court Rules Against White House on Greenhouse Gases [CNBC.com]

Related:
Merkel Don't Need No Merkin: German Chancellor Stands Up for Bruce; Steal This Catalytic Converter [internal]

The Supremes, like their Motown counterparts, showed much love to Detwa automakers today. They unanimously struck down individuals' ability to challenge Ohio's elected officials in a decision granting over $300 million in tax breaks to DaimlerChrysler in a case called DaimlerChrysler v. Cuno. The incentives were provided in return for Daimler building a pretty new Jeep plant in Toledo. Many may argue that these type of targeted ED incentives are nothing more than government picking "winners and losers" and are a form of "corporate welfare," but in reality those people are just wrong.

Let's take a look at one of the best, and most widely used ED incentives around — the performance-based tax break; the exact same tax break used in this case. The incentive in Ohio, called the Manufacturing & Equipment Investment Tax Credit, is based on the Michigan Economic Growth Authority (MEGA) tax incentive created twelve years ago — and it allows a tax break to be granted to a company retaining or adding a certain number of jobs over a period of ten years. Over that period, a company may receive a specific amount of money refunded from their business taxes paid — if and only if they are able to prove they've kept or created the jobs promised. The company receiving the credit must prove it every year for the totality of the years the incentive is offered. It's pretty simple actually — you bring the jobs, you get the credit. It's a huge boon to any community — mostly because business taxes represent only one type of tax paid to government — and a credit provided there doesn't stop the huge indirect gain provided by these jobs. Good deal for all, right? Seems pretty simple.

Well there is one group who doesn't agree. The people who seem to have a problem with this are the "free trade" types — the people who believe, and rightly so, that a level playing field is the best playing field for the economic game — and in the economic game, no one should be getting a free ride or "welfare" in order to play. In theory, these folks are correct — but only in theory. The reality of the situation is that in many cases manufacturing jobs are a zero-sum game — and a zero-sum game played not only between states here within our nation's borders, who would have seen serious job losses had the Supreme Court ruled differently, but with countries as close as Canada and as far as China. In this global economy, where losers are made into winners by governmental dollars and bonding authority, tying the hands of our manufacturers does nothing to either make the playing field more level or make our nation better off.

Supreme Court in DCX case blocks Ohio taxpayer lawsuit [Freep]

Related:
DetroitWonk Defends Governor's Attempts to Keep Wixom Open [Internal]

Slate blogger Mickey Kaus meditated on China's recent currency revaluation, noting that with every 2% increase in the value of the yuan, it makes it 2% easier to buy floundering American brands and use them as venues for their own products. And who fits that bill right now better than General Motors? He also notes that Supreme Court nominee John Roberts drives a PT Cruiser, saying, "This may be the scariest thing I've heard about him. ... An ugly, immature attempt at returning to an earlier era! Is that what the Constitution will look like after Roberts is through with it?" [Thanks to CTE for the tip.]

Does China Want to Buy GM? [Slate]

Related:
The Truth About the GM Death Watch: Employee Discounts Unmasked [Internal]