Title : "Regardless of what you or I may think of the circumstances of this nomination, [Amy Coney] Barrett is highly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court."
link : "Regardless of what you or I may think of the circumstances of this nomination, [Amy Coney] Barrett is highly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court."
"Regardless of what you or I may think of the circumstances of this nomination, [Amy Coney] Barrett is highly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court."
"I disagree with much of her judicial philosophy and expect to disagree with many, maybe even most of her future votes and opinions. Yet despite this disagreement, I know her to be a brilliant and conscientious lawyer who will analyze and decide cases in good faith, applying the jurisprudential principles to which she is committed. Those are the basic criteria for being a good justice. Barrett meets and exceeds them. I got to know Barrett more than 20 years ago when we clerked at the Supreme Court during the 1998-99 term. Of the thirty-some clerks that year... Barrett stood out. Measured subjectively and unscientifically by pure legal acumen, she was one of the two strongest lawyers. The other was Jenny Martinez, now dean of the Stanford Law School. When assigned to work on an extremely complex, difficult case, especially one involving a hard-to-comprehend statutory scheme, I would first go to Barrett to explain it to me. Then I would go to Martinez to tell me what I should think about it."Writes Harvard lawprof Noah Feldman (at Bloomberg). I don't really believe Feldman needed Barrett to explain anything or Martinez to know what to think. The discussion of the 2 women is not really about Feldman's help-seeking but about 2 different approaches to statutory interpretation. Barrett (clerking for Scalia) found the meaning in the text "without reference to legislative history or the aims and context of the statute," and Martinez (clerking for Breyer) would "pragmatically engag[e] the question of what a statute is actually trying to do."
Feldman also vouches for Barrett's character:
To add to her merits, Barrett is a sincere, lovely person. I never heard her utter a word that wasn’t thoughtful and kind — including in the heat of real disagreement about important subjects. She will be an ideal colleague. I don’t really believe in “judicial temperament,” because some of the greatest justices were irascible, difficult and mercurial. But if you do believe in an ideal judicial temperament of calm and decorum, rest assured that Barrett has it.Reading between the lines, I see a recommendation to the Democratic Senators that they adopt a temperament of calm and decorum — and not because civility is good but because incivility will bite them in the ass. I presume the sincere and lovely Amy will have her 7 children lined up right behind her. Feldman is trying to bestow permission on the Democratic Senators to be very kindly toward Barrett, even though the RBG mourners are screaming for blood.
ADDED: Maybe you, like me, were irritated by the phrase "what a statute is actually trying to do." A statute has no mind. It is not trying to do anything. Human beings have minds and they wrote the statute. What legislators were trying to do when they wrote it includes what they could have put in the text and did not. Their legitimate power does not extend to things they'd also want but neglected or chose not to put in the text that was voted on. Feldman makes it sound more sophisticated for a judge to supply what was left out of the text, but the Scalia position on that is that it's illegitimate for judges to enforce what they imagine the legislators were "actually trying to do."
Thus articles "Regardless of what you or I may think of the circumstances of this nomination, [Amy Coney] Barrett is highly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court."
that is all articles "Regardless of what you or I may think of the circumstances of this nomination, [Amy Coney] Barrett is highly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court." This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.
You now read the article "Regardless of what you or I may think of the circumstances of this nomination, [Amy Coney] Barrett is highly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court." with the link address https://usainnew.blogspot.com/2020/09/regardless-of-what-you-or-i-may-think.html
0 Response to ""Regardless of what you or I may think of the circumstances of this nomination, [Amy Coney] Barrett is highly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court.""
Post a Comment