4 Comments
User's avatar
Nina Totenberg's avatar

Stephen Vlsdeck is always thoughtful, but he makes me feel very inferior because he's read so much more than I have

Expand full comment
Robert Beatty's avatar

I follow people like Professor Vladeck because he and others like him are constantly adding to my list of “must reads.” “Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo! So little time! So much to know,”

Expand full comment
Patricia Jaeger's avatar

The intersection of law and literature; it doesn't get any better. Since the courts interpret the law it should not be surprising that people disagree with many rulings, or that interpretations change over time. The English language has a huge inventory of adjectives, adverbs, verbs and punctuation all of which inevitably lead to disagreements and confusion. Some judges write well, others do not. And, language changes over time. I agree that the best we can hope for is that justices have the courage to follow the law to their conclusions, instead of making their conclusions and then looking for points of law to justify them. I also think originalism needs to stop being an excuse for bad reasoning.

Expand full comment
Christopher Sheahen's avatar

Steve’s point is so simple and logical. Why more judges and other legal influencers don’t talk about it is just amazing.

Expand full comment