Today's
@nytimes
piece on "The Crisis in Teaching Constitutional Law" has reminded me I needed to post my recent presentation on "Teaching Constitutional Law in a Crisis of Judicial Supremacy"
I have my doubts that there will actually be an executive order, and I normally don't comment on things that the President has just made up, but I suppose we should nip this in the bud: Any such order would be illegal.
The Fourteenth Amendment question isn't particularly hard. But the statutory question is even easier.
Congress enacted this language in 1952, more than five decades after Wong Kim Ark. There's no ambiguity for an executive order to clarify.
I still remember the law firm interview where the partner asked: "How do you handle silence?"
Me: [says nothing]
[uncomfortably long pause]
[continues staring directly at interviewer]
Partner: [blinks and stammers uncomfortably]
As you will imagine, I did not get the callback.
I know the endorsement of eminent lawyers isnโt what makes a constitutional argument true, but still:
@tribelaw
and
@judgeluttig
in
@TheAtlantic
on Section Three!
The real story is that the ideological orientation of the rest of the legal academy has created an opportunity for two especially excellent law schools (Notre Dame and George Mason) to thrive.
I donโt usually tweet about these things, but I agree with just about everything in this piece by โฆ
@benjaminwittes
โฉ
How Hard Is It to Overturn an American Election? - Lawfare
A new plaque
@IUMaurerLaw
celebrates the Supreme Court decision that vindicated the right to say โweโll take the fucking street later,โ litigated by Professors Schornhorst and Baude.
I just wish, 1, that my dad were alive to see it, and 2, that the plaque were in the street.
I am extremely flattered to have won the Eisenberg Prize from the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers for my article, Precedent and Discretion.
(Article: )
The new Hart & Wechsler 2022 Supplement is (finally) out! This year we mark another milestone in the bookโs history as the great Dick Fallon retires off the book and John Manning,
@jacklgoldsmith
& I welcome Jim Pfander and
@WilliamBaude
onto the book:
Just thinking about how weird it is that the cultural messaging I absorbed as a kid was all, "Reading books is inherently Virtuous!"
... and that as a result I felt like I acquired a shiny halo for reading, like, freakin' Dragonlance
Ugh, friends.
Ducksworth was being "unruly" at a car wash, but the owner and he sort out the problem. He's ok.
Some officers responded. Believing him to be someone else, they ignore the owner, confront Ducksworth, and then tase him. J. Oldham explains.
This is one of the bad things about Twitter. It makes it too easy to follow only the other side's hacks -- and then to start convincing yourself that they are representative of the other side.
The good thing is that you can instead choose to follow thoughtful people.
@cterbeek
(1) we should try to fight the epistemic closure on both sides
(2) part of doing that requires seeing that not *everyone* on the other is a hack even if some are. (And there are plenty of hackish activist-intellectuals on the left!)
Last night I went to watch the protests against judicial reform in Tel Aviv. Truly amazing that more than a hundred thousand people would turn out, week after week, to chant โdemocratiโ in the name of defending a court from politics.
Someone please correct me if this is wrong (seriously) but does the OLC memo even purport to find the actual student loan order lawful? It seems like Part III says that such an order could be lawful, if various conditions obtain, which probably donโt?
All great advice from Orin. I place many of these under the banner of: โdonโt be afraid of your own argument.โ
Your argument might be good or it might be bad, but either way it should be clear and most of your article should be devoted to it!
<My "Top 5" law review article writing tips for those new to law review article writing, esp those on the market:
1) Try not to have a long literature review section. Summarize prior scholarship quickly; spending a lot of pages summarizing prior works comes off as student-like.
"Appeasing Donald Trump Won't Work" by
@DavidAFrench
(grappling with very thoughtful concerns raised by
@DouthatNYT
and Michael McConnell):
Too many important passages to excerpt, but this might be the best:
Seventh Circuit holds that breach of contract alone doesn't provide Art. 3 standing. The breach must result in some additional factual injury. More proof that Spokeo is crazy.
Congratulations to our colleagues Randy & Sam! Our law school community benefits immensely from their scholarship, expertise, and mentorship, and we are grateful to have Sam as a faculty fellow with the RLI.
Here is why I love the students
@UChicagoLaw
:
My colleague
@adamschilton
and I held a virtual lunch talk today, and despite a complete lack of free food, and despite everything going on the world, almost a hundred students showed up, asked questions, and sent us great feedback.
"Constitutional Liquidation" is now in print and online
@StanLRev
:
Thanks to the many readers, editors, and generations of research assistants who made it possible.
One of the three most import free speech policies โฆ
@UChicago
โฉ is the Disciplinary System for Disruptive Conduct | Student Manual | The University of Chicago
Reminds me of a story that the now-deceased judge I clerked for, Ralph Winter, used to tell about a faculty meeting at Yale Law School, where he taught for many years.
It was 1978 or so. Bakke had just come down, and the professors were bemoaning the fact that, under Justiceโฆ
More than five years in the writing/revising, The Official Story of the Law, with
@StephenESachs
, is now available in pre-print from the Oxford Journal of Legal Studies.
SSRN:
OJLS:
NEW: A very interesting and thought-provoking (but not very reassuring!) conversation with Chicago law prof Will Baude on "Election Subversion: How Great a Threat?"
"For the next few years, I'm not sleeping as well as I used to."
Watch the whole thing.
"And so we have arrived, for the first time in our national history, at a state of affairs where almost every major presidential act is immediately frozen by a federal district court. . . . This is bad law and bad democracy. It cannot go on forever."
I agreed to talk about Section Three on Advisory Opinions because
@whignewtons
promised me we could focus on the most intricate textual questions, and she (and
@davidafrench
, of course) did not disappoint:
It is unfortunate that so many prominent criticisms of originalism can be answered with โthis critic has failed to
keep up with the literature.โ
Of course this is probably true for many topics, not just originalism.
Read law prof John McGinnis's very critical
@LawLiberty
review of Stephen Breyer's new book: "Justice Breyer's Problematic 'Pragmatism'"
First sentence is a classic damning with faint praise: "Nothing has improved Stephen Breyer's legal theory work soโฆ
The end of the semester has brought so much good news for various good people that I feel like I need to start a "congratulations" thread. ๐งต
We could start with congratulations to "Professor of the Year"
@TaraLeighGrove1
:
So deeply honored to be selected as โProfessor of the Yearโ by the students at Texas Law. This is truly humbling. Many thanks to all the wonderful students
@UTexasLaw
!!
Next month I'll be joining Michael McConnell and
@espinsegall
in person
@StanfordLaw
to talk through our disagreements about Section Three. Video may be available for those interested in the exchange.
Did you have trouble placing a strong piece of public law scholarship this submission cycle? Consider the Journal of Legal Analysis, a peer-reviewed law journal out of Harvard that I co-edit!
A propos nothing, this is one of those delightful Easterbrook opinions: (What happens if one company pretends to be another company to trick their competitor into signing a contract that includes an arbitration agreement?)
I agree that originalists should pay a lot of attention to the Reconstruction Amendments, but hasn't that been happening for 75 years? From Crosskey/Fairman to Bickel to Berger to Harrison/McConnell/Barnett/Lash/Green/Wurman ...
Do you want to become a law professor? Apply for the Bigelow fellowship
@UChicagoLaw
and become my colleague. Fellows have extensive contact with students and faculty, and receive honest and helpful feedback about their ideas.
I keep reading the claim that C.J. Rehnquist added gold stripes to his robe when he started presiding over President Clinton's impeachment trial.
That's wrong. He added the stripes earlier, in 1995, after seeing them in Gilbert and Sullivan's Iolanthe.
I'm planning a seminar for next year on The Original Meaning of the Privileges or Immunities Clause.
I know some of what I need to assign (e.g., books by Amar/Barnett/Brandwein/Green/Lash/Wurman) but I would welcome suggestions. Self-nominations welcome!
Embarrassing fact. The first draft of my paper was called โPaying Attention to the Orders Listโ but a good friend convinced me nobody would read or cite it.